IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 ITA.No. 704 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.939/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT ----------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- ROYAL RETREAT, 35/3417, MANIKKIRI CROSS ROAD, KOCHI-682016. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2009, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 855 OF 2009 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K. MOHANAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- I.T.A. No. 704,855,907,956,972 & 991 OF 2009 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised is only on the status of the assessee. At the admission stage, Adv. Sri. P. Balakrishnan took notice for the respondents. We have heard standing counsel appearing for the appellants and counsel appearing for the respondents. The reason for assigning the status of "firm' to the assessee is that it executed partnership deed on 1.6.1988 on a stamp paper purchased on 9.9.1988. However, it is seen that partnership is effective from 1.6.1988. After noticing pre-dating of the deed, the firm executed another clarificatory deed making the date of execution of the deed as 9.9.1988, but again giving effective date of commencement of partnership from 1.6.1988. The department has no doubt about the genuineness of the firm or about the business carried on by the firm. We do not find any question of law arising from the orders of the Tribunal granting the status of 2 "firm" to the assessee as against its assessment as AOP. The appeals are consequently dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (V.K. MOHANAN) Judge. kk 3