Kerala High Court
Hll Biotech Limited vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 25 September, 2024
Author: Sathish Ninan
Bench: Sathish Ninan
2024:KER:71166
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 3RD ASWINA, 1946
ITA NO. 241 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2019 IN ITA NO.576 OF 2018 OF
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
-----
APPELLANT/ASSESSEE/APPELLANT IN ITA:
HLL BIOTECH LIMITED
MAHILAMANDIRAM ROAD, POOJAPPURA, TRIVANDRUM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
DR.V.VIJAYAN.
BY ADVS.
M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
K.JOHN MATHAI
JOSON MANAVALAN
KURYAN THOMAS
PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
S.PARVATHI
RESPONDENT/REVENUE/RESPONDENT IN ITA:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.09.2024, ALONG WITH ITA. NOS.245/2019, 243/2019, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71166
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 3RD ASWINA, 1946
ITA NO. 245 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2019 IN ITA NO.577 OF 2018 OF
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
-----
APPELLANT/ASSESSEE/APPELLANT IN ITA:
HLL BIOTECH LIMITED,
MAHILAMANDIRAM ROAD, POOJAPPURA, TRIVANDRUM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
DR.V.VIJAYAN.
BY ADVS.
M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
SMT.S.PARVATHI
RESPONDENT/REVENUE/RESPONDENT IN ITA:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.09.2024, ALONG WITH ITA.241/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71166
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON JOHN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 3RD ASWINA, 1946
ITA NO. 243 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2019 IN ITA NO.578 OF 2018 OF
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
-----
APPELLANT/ASSESSEE/APPELLANT IN ITA:
HLL BIOTECH LIMITED
MAHILAMANDIRAM ROAD, POOJAPPURA, TRIVANDRUM,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DR.V.VIJAYAN
BY ADVS.
M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS
SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM
SMT.S.PARVATHI
RESPONDENT/REVENUE/RESPONDENT IN ITA:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.09.2024, ALONG WITH ITA.241/2019 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:71166
SATHISH NINAN &
JOHNSON JOHN, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I.T.A. Nos.241, 243 & 245 of 2019
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 25th day of September, 2024
J U D G M E N T
Sathish Ninan, J.
The common substantial question of law that arises for
determination in these appeals is,
"Whether the interest income earned by the assessee from the funds
received from the Government of India for setting up of the Company,
taxable as 'income from other sources'".
These appeals are by the assessee, challenging the orders of
the Appellate Tribunal answering the said question in the
affirmative.
2. The appellant Company is set up by the Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare to manufacture and supply
vaccines. It is a 100% subsidiary Company of M/s HLL Life
Care Ltd., a wholly owned Government of India enterprise.
3. Towards setting up of the Integrated Vaccine Complex,
the Government of India sanctioned a total amount of ₹ 285
Crores. The amount was to be released in tranches. As
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
evidenced by Annexures A, B, C and D, ₹ 28 crores, ₹ 150
crores, ₹ 40 crores and ₹ 56.88 crores were released by the
Government on 28.02.2012, 25.09.2012, 18.03.2015 and
19.08.2015 respectively. The balance amount of ₹ 10.12
crores was invested towards 100 acres of land provided for
setting up of the unit.
4. As per Annexure-E letter dated 14.06.2018, the
Government of India clarified that the funds and the income
earned out of the funds are to be utilized only for the
purpose of setting up/establishing the project and not for
any other purpose.
5. Though the construction works for setting up of the
project commenced during the assessment year 2013-14
(Financial Year 2012-13) for completing the project in four
years, it did not work out as planned. The assessee has
sought the support of the Government of India for meeting
the cost escalation, through additional funding.
6. Since the construction activities proceeded in a
phased manner, the assessee had parked certain amounts which
were not immediately required for construction, in Banks and
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
in the holding Company. The assessee received interest from
such short-term deposits. The interest income was set off
against the expenditure incurred for the construction of the
Integrated Vaccine Complex. In the audited financial
statement it was shown under the head, fixed assets.
7. Though the assessing authority as per Annexure-F
assessment orders in the writ petitions, had accepted the
return of income submitted by the assessee for the different
periods covered therein, the Principal Commissioner of
Income Tax initiated revision proceedings under Section 263
of the Income Tax Act and ordered the assessing authority to
pass fresh orders, taking into consideration the
assessability of interest income, in the light of the
judgment of the Apex Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers
Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC).
8. Thereafter the assessing authority passed Annexure-H
orders in ITA No.241/2019, treating the interest received
from out of the investments of the equity funds as, "income
from other sources".
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
9. The orders of the assessing authority were affirmed
in appeals, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as
per Annexure-I order in ITA No.241/2019. The assessee was
also unsuccessful in its further appeals before the Income
Tax Appellate Tribunal. The orders dismissing the appeals is
Annexure-L (common order) in all the IT Appeals. The
authorities held that the interest received from the short-
term deposits are to be treated as income from other sources
and it cannot be set off against the construction
expenditure. It is challenging the same, that these appeals
have been preferred by the assessee.
10. We have heard Sri.Kuryan Thomas, the learned
counsel for the appellant and Sri.Christopher Abraham, the
learned standing counsel for the respondent on the
substantial question of law.
11. The learned counsel for the appellant would contend
that, the interest income received from the deposits is only
in the nature of a capital receipt. The fund and the
interest income therefrom are integrally connected with the
setting up of the project. The infusion of funds by the
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
Government of India was with the specific mandate that the
funds and the income earned out of such funds are to be
utilized exclusively for the purpose of setting up of the
project. Therefore, the utilisation of the interest income
is inextricably linked with the setting up of the project.
Such income could not be treated as "income from other
sources" exigible to tax, it is contended.
12. The learned Standing Counsel for the Department
would on the other hand contend that, the Apex Court has in
Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra)
held that interest income from deposits made by the assessee
during pre-setting up period, is exigible to tax treating
the income as "income from other sources".
13. We have considered the rival submissions.
14. In Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers v. Commissioner of Income
Tax (supra), the Company was incorporated on 03.12.1971, and
the trial production commenced on 30.06.1982. For the
purpose of setting up of the factories, the Company had
availed loans. That part of the funds that were not
immediately required were invested in short-term deposits
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
with Banks. Issue arose whether the interest income derived
from such deposit is taxable. Holding that such interest
income is taxable, the Apex Court noted that the funds
invested were "surplus funds". It was also noted that, the
company was at liberty to use the interest income according
to its wishes and that there was no obligation to use it for
the setting up of the unit. It would be appropriate to refer
to the observations of the Apex Court which reads thus :-
"21. In the case before us, the company had surplus funds in its hands. In
order to earn income out of the surplus funds, it invested the amount for
the purpose of earning interest. The interest thus earned is clearly of
revenue nature and will have to be taxed accordingly. The accountants
may have taken some other view but accountancy practice is not
necessarily good law. In B. S.C. Footwear's case (supra), the House of
Lords had no hesitation in holding that the accounting practice for
calculating its profit followed by the assessee and accepted by the
Revenue for 30 years could not be treated as sanctioned by law and was
not acceptable for the purpose of computation of taxable income.
22. There is another aspect of this matter. The company, in this case, is at
liberty to use the interest income as it likes. It is under no obligation to
utilise this interest income to reduce its liability to pay interest to its
creditors. It can reinvest the interest income in land or shares, it can
purchase securities, it can buy house property, it can also set up another
line of business, it may even pay dividends out of this income to its
shareholders. There is no overriding title of anybody diverting the income
at source to pay the amount to the creditors of the company. It is well
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
settled that tax is attracted at the point when the income is earned.
Taxability of income is not dependent upon its destination or the manner
of its utilisation. It has to be seen whether at the point of accrual, the
amount is of revenue nature. If so, the amount will have to be taxed.
Pondicherry Railway Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1931) 1 Comp Cas 314; AIR 1931
PC 165."
(emphasis supplied by us)
15. The judgment in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers v.
Commissioner of Income Tax was distinguished by the Apex Court in,
Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC). It was
a case where, the work of construction of the Company's
factory and plant were in the process of completion. The
company had not started any business during the relevant
years. During this period the Company rented out its
quarters to the contractor for the residence of the workers
of the contractor. The company also advanced amounts to its
contractors on interest, to enable them to execute the works
smoothly. The interest was later adjusted against the dues
of the contractors. So also, for the purpose of the
construction work, certain plant and machinery were given on
hire by the assessee to the contractors. The Apex Court,
after referring to its judgment in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals &
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
Frerilizers v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra), held that the receipts
under the above heads were intrinsically connected with the
construction of its plant. The receipts went to reduce the
cost of construction and therefore, were capital receipts
and not income of the assessee. Referring to the Tuticorin Alkali
Chemicals & Fertilizers case it was observed,
"This Court held that if a person borrows money for business purposes but
utilises that money to earn interest, however, temporarily, the interest so
generated will be his income. This income can be utilised by the assessee
whichever way he likes". . . . "The Company was free to use this
income in any manner it liked. However, while interest earned by investing
borrowed capital in short-term deposits is an independent source of income
not connected with the construction activities or business activities of the
assessee, the same cannot be said in the present case where the utilisation
of various assets of the company and the payments received for such
utilisation are directly linked with the activity of setting up the steel plant of
the assessee. These receipts are inextricably linked with the setting up of the
capital structure of the assessee-company. They must, therefore, be viewed
as capital receipts going to reduce the cost of construction".
It was also held :-
"... In case money is borrowed by a newly started company which
is in the process of constructing or erecting its plant, the interest incurred
before the commencement of production on such borrowed money can be
captialised and added to the cost of the fixed assets created as a result of
such expenditure. By the same reasoning if the assessee receives any
amounts which are inextricably linked with the process of setting up its
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
plant and machinery, such receipts will go to reduce the cost of its assets.
These are receipts of a capital nature and cannot be taxed as income."
(emphasis supplied by us)
16. In Roads & Bridges Development Corporation of Kerala Ltd. v.
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2018) 257 Taxman 392 (Ker) , a Division
Bench of this Court, considering the question as to whether
the interest accrued on mobilisation advances made by the
assessee to its contractors is capital income or revenue
income, after referring to the judgments of the Apex Court
in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra)
and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (supra) held that the
interest income received therein was capital receipt.
17. In Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. FACOR Power Ltd. (2016)
283 CTR (Del) 141, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court was
dealing with the question as to whether the interest income
on fixed deposit receipts placed with the Bank as margin
money for procurement of various capital goods for setting
up of the power project, is liable to be taxed as "income
from other sources". The Bench, finding that the fixed
deposits were inextricably linked with the setting up of the
power plant, held that the interest income therefrom was in
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
the nature of a capital receipt and not a revenue receipt.
The Bench relied on an earlier Division Bench judgment of
that court in Indian Oil Panipat Power Consortium Ltd. v. ITO (2009) 315 ITR
255 (Del) wherein, after referring to the judgment of the Apex
Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers case and Bokaro Steel Ltd.
(supra) held :-
"... The test which permeates through the judgment of the Supreme Court
in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals (supra) is that if funds have been borrowed
for setting up of a plant and if the funds are 'surplus' and then by virtue of
that circumstance they are invested in fixed deposits the income earned in
the form of interest will be taxable under the head 'Income from other
sources'. On the other hand the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in
Bokaro Steel Ltd. (supra) to our mind is that if income is earned, whether
by way of interest or in any other manner on funds which are otherwise
inextricably linked to the setting up of the plant, such income is required
to be capitalized to be set off against pre-operative expenses.
5.1 The test, therefore, to our mind is whether the activity which is taken
up for setting up of the business and the funds which are garnered are
inextricably connected to the setting up of the plant. The clue is perhaps
available in s.3 of the Act which states that for newly set up business the
previous year shall be the period beginning with the date of setting up of
the business. Therefore, as per the provision of s. 4 of the Act which is the
charging section income which arises to an assessee from the date of
setting of the business but prior to commencement is chargeable to tax
depending on whether it is of a revenue nature or capital receipt. ...
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
5.2 It is clear upon a perusal of the facts as found by the authorities below
that the funds in the form of share capital were infused for a specific
purpose of acquiring land and the development of infrastructure.
Therefore, the interest earned on funds primarily brought for infusion in
the business could not have been classified as income from other sources.
Since the income was earned in a period prior to commencement of
business it was in the nature of capital receipt and hence was required to
be set off against pre-operative expenses. In the case of Tuticorin Alkali
Chemicals (supra) it was found by the authorities that the funds available
with the assessee in that case were 'surplus' and, therefore, the Supreme
Court held that the interest earned on surplus funds would have to be
treated as 'income from other sources'. On the other hand in Bokaro Steel
Ltd. (supra) where the assessee had earned interest on advance paid to
contractors during pre-commencement period was found to be
'inextricably linked' to the setting up of the plant of the assessee and hence
was held to be a capital receipt which was permitted to be set off against
pre-operative expenses."
After referring to the above, the Division Bench in Principal
Commissioner of Income Tax v. FACOR Power Ltd. (supra) held :-
"11. From the above extract, it is evident that the test that is required to
be employed is whether the activity which is taken up for setting up of the
business and the funds which are garnered are inextricably connected to
the setting up of the same. ..."
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
18. From the above judgments it is clear that, if the
funds invested are not surplus funds as such, and the funds
and interest accrued thereon are inextricably linked to the
setting up of the business, and its use, including the
interest income therefrom, is to be exclusively for the
setting up of the business, then the 'interest income' from
such funds would be in the nature of capital receipts.
19. With the above in mind, we proceed to consider the
facts of the present case.
20. While considering the nature of the amount received
by the assessee and the purpose of its utilisation,
Annexure-E communication dated 14.06.2018, from the
Government of India to the assessee is of much significance.
The same is extracted hereunder :-
"
F. No. A-450 13/07/2018-HPE
Government of India
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Nirman Bhawan, NewDelhi
Dated the 14th June, 2018
To
The Chief Executive Officer,
M/s HLL Biotech Limited,
SR No: 192 & 195, Tirumani Village,
Chengalpattu-603001.
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
Subject: Utilisation of Interest earned on equity fund of Rs.274.88
Crore-reg.
Sir,
The undersigned is directed to refer to your letter dated 22 nd January
2018. The GOI has infused Rs.285 Crore towards equity fund through
HLL Lifecare Limited for establishing Integrated Vaccine Complex at
Chengalpattu out of which Rs.274.88 Cr. was paid in cash and 100
acre of land in kind with a valuation of Rs.10.12 Cr. As a general
policy, any income earned out of funds provided by GOI for any
specific purpose, must be utilised only for the purpose for which
such funds are released.
2. It is clarified that, any interest earned by way of depositing
the said equity funds in Banks or otherwise form part of funds for
establishing the integrated Vaccine Project at Chengalpattu,
Chennai and to be utilised for the purpose of the project only and
not for any other purpose.
This issues with the approval of JS (HPE).
Yours faithfully,
(Soma Sanyal)
Under Secretary to the Govt. of India
Tele. 23061203"
(Emphasis supplied by us)
In the communication, it has been categorically mandated
that the funds and income earned out of the funds provided
by the Government shall be utilised only for the purpose for
which they are released. It has also been clarified that any
interest income from the said funds consequent on bank
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
deposits, shall also be utilised only for the purpose of the
project. Therefore it is evident that the deposits and the
income are inextricably linked with the setting up of the
project. It is not in dispute that the setting up of the
project was not over and is in the process. The funds
disbursed and utilised are stage-wise. The portion of the
funds kept in short-term deposits could not be termed as
"surplus amounts" which could be utilised as per the wish
and will of the Company. The funds, with the income derived
therefrom are to be used exclusively for the setting of the
project.
21. Thus understanding the characteristics of the
amount, we hold that the "interest income" on the short-term
deposits of the funds infused by the Government are, in the
case at hand, in the nature of "capital receipt" and not
"revenue receipt". We cannot agree with the finding of the
authorities to the contrary. The substantial question of law
ITA Nos.241, 243 &
245 of 2019
2024:KER:71166
posed, is answered accordingly and in favour of the
assessee.
The appeals are accordingly, allowed. Orders of the
authorities will stand set aside.
Sd/-
SATHISH NINAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
JOHNSON JOHN
JUDGE
kns/-
//True Copy//
P.S. To Judge
2024:KER:71166
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28/02/2012
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/09/2012
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18/03/2015
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19/08/2015
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14/06/2018
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
26/12/2016 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT.
ANNEXURE F1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BALANCE SHEET AS AT
31/03/2014 OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE G THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23/03/2018
ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR THE
A.Y.2014-15.
ANNEXURE H THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24/09/2018
ISSUED BY THE ITAT, COCHIN BENCH.
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30/11/2018
ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR THE YEAR
2014-15.
ANNEXURE J TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM (WITHOUT
ANNEXURES) DATED 14/12/2018 FILED BEFORE BY
THE APPELLANT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH.
2024:KER:71166
ANNEXURE K TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON HEARING NOTE (DATED
NIL WITHOUT ANNEXURES) SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
ITAT, COCHIN BENCH.
ANNEXURE L TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED
19/03/2019 ISSUED BY THE ITAT, COCHIN BENCH.
-----
2024:KER:71166
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.02.2012 ISSUED
BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MOHFW
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.09.2012 ISSUED
BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.03.2015 ISSUED
BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.08.2015 ISSUED
BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT
ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.06.2018 ISSUED
BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT
ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
19.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION 143(2) TO THE ACT
ANNEXURE F1 TRUE COPY OF THE BALANCE SHEET AS AT 31.03.2015
OF THE APPELLANT
ANNEXURE G TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2018 PASSED
BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (APPEALS)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR THE A.Y 2015-16
ANNEXURE H TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM (WITHOUT
ANNEXURES) DATED 14.12.2018 FILED BEFORE BY THE
APPELLANT THE INCOME TAX APPLLATE TRIBUNAL,
COCHIN BENCH
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE COMMEN HEARING NOTE (DATED NIL
- WITHOUT ANNEXURES) SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ITAT,
COCHIN BENCH
ANNEXURE J TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED
19-03-2019 ISSUED BY THE ITAT, COCHIN BENCH.
-----
2024:KER:71166
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.02.2012
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.09.2012
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18.03.2015
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19.08.2015
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW WITH COPY OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.06.2018
ISSUED BY THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA, MOHFW TO THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
28.01.2016 ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT.
ANNEXURE G TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.03.2018
PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM UNDER SECTION
263 OF THE ACT.
ANNEXURE H TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED
28.06.2018 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(3) READ
WITH SECTION 263 OF THE ACT.
ANNEXURE H1 TRUE COPY OF THE BALANCE SHEET AS AT
31.03.2013 OF THE APPELLANT.
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2018
ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR THE
A.Y.2013-14.
2024:KER:71166
ANNEXURE J TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM (WITHOUT
ANNEXURES) DATED 14.12.2018 FILED BEFORE THE
APPELLANT THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
COCHIN BENCH.
ANNEXURE K TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON HEARING NOTE (DATED
NIL - WITHOUT ANNEXURES) SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
ITAT, COCHIN BENCH.
ANNEXURE L TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED
19.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE ITAT, COCHIN BENCH.
Annexure M TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2019
PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN IA NO.1
OF 2019 IN ITS NO.241/2019.
Annexure N TRUE COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR 2014-15.
Annexure O TRUE COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR 2015-16.
Annexure P TRUE COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR 2016-17.
Annexure Q TRUE COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR 2017-18.
Annexure R TRUE COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR 2018-19.
Annexure S TRUE COPY OF THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT
FOR THE YEAR 2020-21.
Annexure T TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
01.10.2019 IN IA NO.2/2019 IN ITA NO.243 OF
2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) GRANTED BY THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
Annexure U TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
30.10.2019 IN ITA NO.245 OF 2019 (A.Y. 2014-
15 GRANTED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
-----
