What is K.P. Varghese v. ITO authority for?

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

How many judgments cite K.P. Varghese v. ITO?

989 judgments on BharatTax cite K.P. Varghese v. ITO (131 ITR 597), spanning 2000 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does K.P. Varghese v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 132, Section 292C, Section 69, Section 153C.

K.P. Varghese v. ITO (131 ITR 597)

Gopalsamy, Chennai vs. CIT(A)-18, Chennai

The appeals stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1384/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1384/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1385/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1386/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Gopalsamy Vs. Acit No.3B, 3Rd Floor New No.27 Dc/Ac Central Cir 1(2) East Street, Krishna Apartments, Chennai Raghava Reddy Colony, Ashok Nagar, Chennai 600 083. [Pan: Bjtpg 4193H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Subramanian, C.A., ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21.05.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Subramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT

Section 153CSection 253

…evidence or finding that the alleged loose paper has materialized into transactions. Therefore, merely by relying upon these jottings, no such additions could be made. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 24 CTR (SC) 358/[1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) held that the fictional receipt cannot be deemed to be a receipt in the absence of any cogent material to support the factum of actual receipt. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi (Central)-II v. D.K. Gupta [2008] 174 TAXMAN 476 (DELHI) upheld the order of the tribunal wherein it was held that Ad-hoc…

Ibm Global Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3464/BANG/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2000-2001

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2000-2001

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 10A(2)Section 10A(2)(ia)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…uld be considerably reduced. This, in our opinion, cannot be the scheme of the Act. In any event, the EXIM policy explained hereinabove is clear on this aspect. 4.14 In this regard, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v. ITO reported in (1981) 131 ITR 597 held that, a literal construction that leads to absurdity, unjust result or mischief should be avoided. Similarly Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd. reported in (1991) 62 Taxman 480, with respect to relief for new industrial undertaking under section 15C of the Income-tax Act, 1922, held that, such provisions should be construe…

Huntsman Investments (Netherlands), Mumbai vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle-2(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4222/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss. Padmavathy S.

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 234ASection 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MISS. PADMAVATHY S., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Huntsman Investments (Netherlands) BV, Light Hall B-Wing, Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 400072 PAN: AACCHG0845D APPELLANT vs ITA 4222/Mum/2023 (Assessment year : 2021-22) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax Circle-2(2)(2), Mumbai RESPONDENT Assessee by Shri Nitesh Joshi Respondent by Date of hearing Date of pronouncement Smt. Shailaja Rai, CIT. DR 15/05/2024 31/07/2024 PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: ORDER Instant appeal of the Revenue was…

Shree Vyaghreshwar Kulswami Pariwar, Pune vs. The CIT (Exemption) Pune, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 896/PUN/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…ry of the period of the provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is later; 9. We are also fortified in adopting the above construction by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese Vs. ITO 131 ITR 597 (SC). 10. Adverting to the facts of the present case, undisputedly, the appellant trust commenced its actual activities on 26.02.1981 and in view of the above construction of clause (iii) of proviso to section 80G(5) the appellant trust is entitled to file the application for regular approval prior to six months of expiry of the provisional appr…

Dhanvarsha Nagri Sahakari Patasantha Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

Accordingly, in view of paragraph 10 to 15 above, disallowance of INR.32,63,969/- is deleted and claim of deduction under Section 80P of the Act as made by the Appellant is allowed

ITA 1600/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: the Tribunal. Therefore, the delay of 22 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. We note that the Appellant has raised the following grounds in the

For Appellant: Shri Vijaykumar ShindeFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…Firstly, the marginal note to section 80P which reads "Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies" is important, in that it indicates the general "drift" of the provision. This was so held by this Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 as follows: "9. This interpretation of sub-section (2) is strongly supported by the marginal note to Section 52 which reads "Consideration for transfer in cases of understatement". It is undoubtedly true that the marginal note to a section cannot be referred to for the purpose of construing the section but it can certainly be relied upon as indic…

Dhanvarsha Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

ITA 1599/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

For Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Shinde

Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 40Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…Firstly, the marginal note to section 80P which reads "Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies" is important, in that it indicates the general "drift" of the provision. This was so held by this Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 as follows: "9. This interpretation of sub-section (2) is strongly supported by the marginal note to Section 52 which reads…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 618/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 617/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 616/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 615/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 614/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 613/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 612/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 611/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR

Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…5.5 It was submitted that it is consistently settled law that the circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the revenue authorities. Some of the Supreme Court cases on the aforesaid aspect as relied are as follows;  K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 7 Taxman 13/131 ITR 597 (SC)  Navnit lal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen Appellate Asstt. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 198 (SC) 13 ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022  Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT [1990] 49 Taxman 87/183 ITR 1 (SC)  Ellerman Lines Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 913 (SC)  Collector of Central Excise v. Dhiren Chemical Industries 2002 taxmann.com 902 (SC) 5.6 During the course of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 41(1)(1), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc vs. Jaj International, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds relating to merit the file of the Ld

ITA 2147/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. Subhash Shetty

Section 143(3)Section 153C

…case successfully and satisfactorily that the assessee had actually paid the on assessee had actually paid the on-money. The decision rendered by the Hon'ble The decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese 131 ITR 597 is squarely applicable to the facts in the present Varghese 131 ITR 597 is squarely applicable to the facts in the present Varghese 131 ITR 597 is squarely applicable to the facts in the present case, which held that: case, which held that: "It is a well settled rule of law that the onus of establishing that the "It is a well settled rule of law…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kautilya Bhawan vs. Jaj International, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds relating to merit the file of the Ld

ITA 2146/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mr. Subhash Shetty

Section 143(3)Section 153C

…case successfully and satisfactorily that the assessee had actually paid the on assessee had actually paid the on-money. The decision rendered by the Hon'ble The decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese 131 ITR 597 is squarely applicable to the facts in the present Varghese 131 ITR 597 is squarely applicable to the facts in the present Varghese 131 ITR 597 is squarely applicable to the facts in the present case, which held that: case, which held that: "It is a well settled rule of law that the onus of establishing that the "It is a well settled rule of law…

Sou Dwarkabai Shastri Patwardhan Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1958/MUM/2024[2025-2026]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2025-2026

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2025-26

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT D.R

Section 80GSection 80G(5)

…endment procedure. 7. In this background we have to interpret the relevant provisions. To interpret the provisions, we shall refer to the Budget Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister. 7.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K P Varghese Vs. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC) has observed as under regarding use of Speech of a Minister as a tool in interpretation: Quote , “ Now it is true that the speeches made by the Members of the Legislature on the floor of the House when a Bill for enacting a statutory provision is being debated are inadmissible for the purpose of interpreting the statutory provision but the s…

ADIT Balbhim Vyayam Shala, Sangli vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 779/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.779/Pun/2024 अपील Adi Balbhim Vyayam Shala, Vishnughat, Gaonbhag, Sangli – 414 416, Maharashtra .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaata3971A बनाम बनाम / V/S. बनाम बनाम Cit(Exemption), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.07.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12.07.2024 आदेश आदेश / Order आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…ry of the period of the provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is later; 9. We are also fortified in adopting the above construction by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese Vs. ITO 131 ITR 597 (SC). 10. Adverting to the facts of the present case, undisputedly, the appellant trust commenced its actual activities on 30.12.1968 and in view of the above construction of clause (iii) of proviso to section 80G(5) the appellant trust is entitled to file the application for 5 Adi Balbhim Vyayam Shala regular approval prior to six months of ex…

Mohammed Ibrabim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 486/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 153ASection 69B

…the argument of Mr. Sabharwal that judicial notice can be taken of the practice prevailing in the property market of not disclosing the full consideration for transfer of properties”. 4.34 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) held that the capital gains is intended to tax the gains of assessee not what an assessee might have gained and what is not gained cannot be computed as gain and the assessee cannot fastened with the liability on a fictional income. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shivakami Co. (P.) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 71 (SC) hel…

Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 466/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 153ASection 69B

…the argument of Mr. Sabharwal that judicial notice can be taken of the practice prevailing in the property market of not disclosing the full consideration for transfer of properties”. 4.34 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese vs. ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) held that the capital gains is intended to tax the gains of assessee not what an assessee might have gained and what is not gained cannot be computed as gain and the assessee cannot fastened with the liability on a fictional income. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shivakami Co. (P.) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 71 (SC) hel…

K.P. Varghese v. ITO

What is K.P. Varghese v. ITO authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing K.P. Varghese v. ITO

Gopalsamy, Chennai vs. CIT(A)-18, Chennai

Ibm Global Services India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(1), Bangalore

Huntsman Investments (Netherlands), Mumbai vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle-2(2)(2), Mumbai

Shree Vyaghreshwar Kulswami Pariwar, Pune vs. The CIT (Exemption) Pune, Pune

Dhanvarsha Nagri Sahakari Patasantha Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

Dhanvarsha Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 28(1)(3), Navi Mumbai

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle- 41(1)(1), Mumbai, Kautilya Bhawan, Bkc vs. Jaj International, Mumbai

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Kautilya Bhawan vs. Jaj International, Mumbai

Sou Dwarkabai Shastri Patwardhan Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai

ADIT Balbhim Vyayam Shala, Sangli vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

Mohammed Ibrabim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

Mohammed Ibrahim Mohideen, Kerala vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangalore