IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 ITA.No. 68 of 2001() ---------------------------- ITA.48/COCH/1998 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT : ----------------- M/S. MAMATHA MOTELS, SWAPNA NIVAS, TC-34/1884, P.O. KOORKENCHERY, THRISSUR 680 007, REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI.E.V. SIDHARTHAN. BY SRI.SARANGAN (ST. COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT BY ADV. SRI.K.VINOD CHANDRAN RESPONDENT: --------------------- THE AST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INV.CIRCLE 1, DIVISION - I, TRICHUR. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2008, ALONG WITH ITA NO. 80 OF 2001 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A.Nos.68, 70, 79, 80, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 & 102 of 2001 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard learned Senior Counsel Shri Sarangan for the assessee and Shri P.K.R. Menon, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the department. The connected appeals arise from block assessment completed in the name of a firm by name Mamatha Motels and individual assessments in the case of some of the partners. It is conceded by both sides that pursuant to remand by the Tribunal, fresh block assessment is completed after issuing notice to all the partners. However, learned Senior counsel for the Revenue contended that the assessee has not accepted fresh assessment and appeals against the same are pending before the Tribunal. On going through the order of the Tribunal, against which these appeals are filed, we find that the Tribunal in principle, upheld the single assessment in the name of the firm after rejecting the assessee's objection against it. However, on the merits of the assessment, the Tribunal held that the assessment completed without issuing notice to the several retired partners, is not correct because retired ITA 68/2001 etc. -2- partners are personally liable for payment of tax. We do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal, more so when pursuant to the order of remand, revised assessment is completed and fresh appeals are filed against them. 2. We therefore dismiss these appeals leaving freedom to all the parties to raise contentions in the appeals pending before the Tribunal against the revised assessment order issued pursuant to the order of remand. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ ITA 68/2001 etc. -3- C.N. Ramachandran Nair & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.A.Nos.68, 70, 79, 80, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99 & 102 of 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 17th March, 2008.