K.P. Varghese v. ITO

131 ITR 597Supreme Court of India1981#44 most cited

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.

989

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2026.

Also referred to as

K.P. Varghese v. ITO · 131 ITR 597 · difference in valuation · unexplained investment · Valuation Officer report · deletion of addition · Assessing Officer enquiry · Section 69 · Section 69A · Section 115BBE · no addition on suspicion · understatement of consideration

Also reported as

7 Taxmann 13

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 292CSection 69Section 153CSection 115BBESection 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 52closely held companyaccumulated profitsdumb documentssection 132(4a)section 131(1a)section 260section 69bsection 292csection 292bsection 292

Judgments citing K.P. Varghese v. ITO

D.C.I.T Cir - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S Celica Developers Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1233/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 263

…ere is no material on record to show that the shares were transferred by the appellant at a higher rate than what has been declared in the return. The AO has merely adopted a hypothetical figure to estimate the sale consideration. In the case of K P Vargheese 131 ITR 597, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that it was for the revenue to establish that the sale consideration was understated by the assessee; and, in case there is no supporting material on record, the AO has no authority to substitute the fair market value of the transferred capital asset for the sale consideration. In the case of Shri Ramalinga Cho…

D.C.I.T Cir - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S Raima Equities Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1994/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Divakar Chakraborty, JCIT, Sr. DRFor Respondent: ShriAshok Kr. Tulsyan, FCA &
Section 143(3)Section 43Section 73

…i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.1984 from when the section was brought on the statute. 6.4.6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs J.H.Gotla reported in (1985) 156 ITR 323 (SC) at page 339 and 340 had observed as under:- “In the case of K P Varghese vs ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 , this court emphasized that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could never have been intended by the legislature, the court might modify the language used by the legislature s…

M/S. Ramnagar Pachai & C.S. (S) Shop vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Asansol

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 148/KOL/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri S. K. Tulsiyan & R. N. Ram, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ITO in ITA No. 873/ Kol/2012 dated 6.2.2014 e) Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Amrai Pachwai & C.S. Shop vs DCIT in ITA No. 1251/ Kol/2011 dated 15.1.2014 f) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese vs ITO & Anr. reported in (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) 11. In response to this, the ld DR argued that in the case of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court supra relied upon by the ld AR, the same was in respect of payment made to Railways and hence the same is not applicable for the facts of the instant case. Similarly in respect of case of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court supra relied upon by the ld AR, th…

M/S Ramnagar Pachai & C. S. (S) Shop, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-2(3), Asansol

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 186/KOL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri S. K. Tulsiyan & R. N. Ram, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ITO in ITA No. 873/ Kol/2012 dated 6.2.2014 e) Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Amrai Pachwai & C.S. Shop vs DCIT in ITA No. 1251/ Kol/2011 dated 15.1.2014 f) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese vs ITO & Anr. reported in (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) 11. In response to this, the ld DR argued that in the case of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court supra relied upon by the ld AR, the same was in respect of payment made to Railways and hence the same is not applicable for the facts of the instant case. Similarly in respect of case of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court supra relied upon by the ld AR, th…

M/S Ramnagar Pachai & C. S. (S) Shop, Burdwan vs. ITO, WD-2(3), Asansol

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 185/KOL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri S. K. Tulsiyan & R. N. Ram, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…ITO in ITA No. 873/ Kol/2012 dated 6.2.2014 e) Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Amrai Pachwai & C.S. Shop vs DCIT in ITA No. 1251/ Kol/2011 dated 15.1.2014 f) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P.Varghese vs ITO & Anr. reported in (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) 11. In response to this, the ld DR argued that in the case of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court supra relied upon by the ld AR, the same was in respect of payment made to Railways and hence the same is not applicable for the facts of the instant case. Similarly in respect of case of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court supra relied upon by the ld AR, th…

ITO 14(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Takhtmal Bhuralal Pichholiya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4526/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 4526 To 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12 The Ito-14(1)(3), Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal बनाम/ Earnest House, Pichholiya, Vs. Nariman Point, (Prop. Metal Agencies), Mumbai-400 021 Room No. 28, 2Nd Floor, 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002 C.O. Nos. 212 To 214/Mum/2015 (Arising Out Of I.Ta Nos. 4526 To 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12 Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal The Ito-14(1)(3), बनाम/ Pichholiya, Earnest House, Vs. (Prop. Metal Agencies), Nariman Point, Room No. 28, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai-400 021 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya
Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E ” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /I.TA Nos. 4526 to 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 to 2011-12 The ITO-14(1)(3), Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal बनाम/ Earnest House, Pichholiya, Vs. Nariman Point, (Prop. Metal Agencies), Mumbai-400 021 Room No. 28, 2nd Floor, 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002 C.O. Nos. 212 to 214/Mum/2015 (Arising out of I.TA Nos. 4526 to 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 to 2011-12 Shri T…

M/S Instrumentarium Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. DDIT (It)-1(1), Kolkata

ITA 1549/KOL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jul 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: The Special Bench:

…of ALP adjustment, would be insufficient to offset the tax forgone by the Government on account of deduction available to Indian AEs of the assessee. He then refers to Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of K P Verghese Vs Income Tax Officer [(1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC)] in support of the proposition that a statute should be interpreted in a manner to achieve and advance the legislative intent. Learned counsel also referred to, and relied upon, the judicial precedents in support of the proposition that the circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes are binding upon all the field officers, and it…

ADIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc., Dehradun

ITA 1332/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiadit, Halliburton Offshore Services International Taxation, Inc. , Vs. 13-A,Subhash Road, C/O. Nangia & Company, Ca, Aayakar Bhawan, 75/7, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun Pan:Aaach5154M (Appellant) (Respondent) Halliburton Offshore Services Addl. Cit, Inc. , International Taxation, Vs. C/O. Nangia & Company, Ca, Subhash Road, Suite-4A, Plaza M-6, Jasola, Dehradun New Delhi Pan:Aaach5154M (Appellant) (Respondent) Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. , Adit, C/O. Nangia & Company, Ca, International Taxation, Vs. Suite-4A, Plaza M-6, Jasola, 13-A,Subhash Road, New Delhi Aayakar Bhawan, Pan:Aaach5154M Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. Vs Ddit (International Taxation)

Section 144CSection 44Section 44BSection 9

…" means a lease granted for the purposes of searching for, winning, working, getting, making merchandisable, carrying away or disposing of mineral oils or for the purpose connected therewith and such a lease includes an exploring or * [1981] 4 SCC 173; [1981] 131 ITR 597 (SC). prospecting lease. Reference has also been made to the Petroleum and Natural Gas Rules, 1959, framed under section 5 of the aforesaid Act. Under rule 4 of the said Rules no person can prospect for petroleum except pursuant to a petroleum exploration license (PEL) granted under the Rules and no person can mine petroleum except in pursuance…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 955/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…ive in operation, i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.1984 from when the section was brought on the statue. 5.6.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323) at page 339 and 340 thereof has observed as under: - "In the case of Varghese v. ITO [1981]131 ITR 597, this court emphasised that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. "Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could never have been intended by the Legislature, the court might modify the language used by the Legislature s…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1349/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…ive in operation, i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.1984 from when the section was brought on the statue. 5.6.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323) at page 339 and 340 thereof has observed as under: - "In the case of Varghese v. ITO [1981]131 ITR 597, this court emphasised that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. "Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could never have been intended by the Legislature, the court might modify the language used by the Legislature s…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Gurcharan Singh, New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 4730/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra : & Smt. Beena A. Pillai:Asstt. Yr: 2003-04 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sh. Gurcharan Singh, Ward 33(2), New Delhi. 38/2065, Naiwala Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005. Pan: Aatps 6989 D ( Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt. Ritu Sharma Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri K.P. Ganguly Adv
Section 50C

…prevailing market price and the affidavit confirming that the said property was sold for Rs. 13,50,000/- by Shri Gurcharan Singh to 4 parties had been filed before the AO. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese vs. ITO 131 ITR 597 to submit that apparent state of affair is real unless contrary is proved. 8. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. The facts are not disputed. Admittedly the property earlier had been agreed to be sold at Rs. 68,00,000/- and the assessee had also got advance of Rs. 20 lacs in pursuance o…

Chandrasekhar Maruti Musale, Thane vs. Asst CIT 10(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5410/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5410/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2009-10) वष" Shri Chandrasekhar Maruti Vs. Acit-10(2), Mumbai- Musale Flat No.1203/1204, 400020 12Th Floor, Carlyle Raheja Garden, Lbs Marg, Off. Tip Top Thane, Mumbai-400604 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aczpm 3914 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" क" ओर क" क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri Chetan A. Karia राज"व क" क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Dr. S.Pandian सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29/03/2016 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 15/06/2016 आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Dated 21-5-2012. 2. The Assessee Through Its Grounds Of Appeal Has Agitated The Addition Of Income Made By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ao) At The Hands Of The Assessee On Account Of Deemed Dividend U/S.2(22)(E) Of The Income Tax Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Deriving Income From Salary, House Property & Other Sources. The Assessee Was Having Major Shareholding In 3 Companies Namely; (I) M/S.Anachem Instruments India P.Ltd. (Ii) M/ S. Advance Scientific Equipment P.Ltd. & (Iii) M/S. Star Earth Minerals P.Ltd. During Assessment Proceedings, From The Replies Filed By The Assessee, The Ao Noticed That M/S. Anachem Instruments India P.Ltd. Had Advanced An Amount Of Rs.31,00,000/- On 16.12.2008 To M/S. Advance Scientific Equipment P. Ltd. & M/S.

Section 2(22)(e)

…IT & Anr.,” (2015) CTR (Kar) 338 has discussed at length the purpose and object of the provisions of Section 2(22)(e) in new the Act. In the aforesaid case, while relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K.P. Varghese v. ITO” [1981] 131 ITR 597, the Hon’ble High Court has observed that the task of interpretation of a statutory enactment is not a mechanical task. It is an attempt to discover the intent of the Legislature from the language used by it and such attempt must always be made. Though it is true that the words used, even in their literal sense, are the primary and ordinarily the…

Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 2981/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4493/Del./2009 : A.Y. : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath Adv. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Chand, C.I.T, DR
Section 115Section 115WSection 139(1)

…Accordingly, the bank’s contributions to Pension Fund are in lieu of bank’s contributions towards the provident fund. (Refer Paper Book page no. 6 for CBDT letter dated 03.01.1996) III. As held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case K.P.Varghese v/s ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) [Refer paper book page no. 7-23]. The speech made by the mover of Finance Bill explaining the reasons for introduction of the bill can certainly be referred to for the purpsoe of ascertaining the mischief sought to be remedied by the legislation and the object and the purpose for which the legislation was enacted.” 10. The assessee also ref…

Punjab National Bank, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4254/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4493/Del./2009 : A.Y. : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath Adv. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Chand, C.I.T, DR
Section 115Section 115WSection 139(1)

…Accordingly, the bank’s contributions to Pension Fund are in lieu of bank’s contributions towards the provident fund. (Refer Paper Book page no. 6 for CBDT letter dated 03.01.1996) III. As held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case K.P.Varghese v/s ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) [Refer paper book page no. 7-23]. The speech made by the mover of Finance Bill explaining the reasons for introduction of the bill can certainly be referred to for the purpsoe of ascertaining the mischief sought to be remedied by the legislation and the object and the purpose for which the legislation was enacted.” 10. The assessee also ref…

Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi vs. Addll. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 3869/DEL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Ita No. 4493/Del./2009 : A.Y. : 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. K. Sampath Adv. Raj Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Chand, C.I.T, DR
Section 115Section 115WSection 139(1)

…Accordingly, the bank’s contributions to Pension Fund are in lieu of bank’s contributions towards the provident fund. (Refer Paper Book page no. 6 for CBDT letter dated 03.01.1996) III. As held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case K.P.Varghese v/s ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) [Refer paper book page no. 7-23]. The speech made by the mover of Finance Bill explaining the reasons for introduction of the bill can certainly be referred to for the purpsoe of ascertaining the mischief sought to be remedied by the legislation and the object and the purpose for which the legislation was enacted.” 10. The assessee also ref…

Sri S S Jyothi Prakash vs. The Addl Commissioner

The appeal is allowed accordingly

ITA/460/2010HC Karnataka07 Jun 2016

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 260Section 68Section 69

…assessee had paid extra consideration over and above what was stated in the sale deed. This very issue has come up for consideration before this court repeatedly and after following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC), the aforesaid proposition of law is reiterated time and again. For our benefit, we may refer to the latest judgment of this court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Suraj Devi (2010) 328 ITR 604 (Delhi), wherein this court had held that the primary burden of proof to prove understatement or concealment of income is on the Revenue and i…

Fiduciary Shares & Stocks P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 321/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainfiduciary Shares & Stock P. Ltd. Acit, Circle 4(2) Unit No. T7B, 5Th Floor, Phoenix Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road House, Block No. 2, Phoenix Mills Vs. Mumbai 400020 Compound, 462, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai 400013 Pan - Aaacf9759N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 73

…ctive in operation, i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.1984 from when the section was brought on the statue. 5.6.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. J.H. Gotla (156 ITR 323) at page 339 and 340 thereof has observed as under: - "In the case of Varghese v. ITO [1981]131 ITR 597, this court emphasised that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. "Where the plain literal interpretation of a statutory provision produces a manifestly unjust result which could never have been intended by the Legislature, the court might modify the language used by the Legislature s…

ACIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Celetronix India P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross-objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5433/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.5433/Mum/2009 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) बनधम/ Celetronix India Pvt Ltd, Asstt. Commissioner Of Income C/O Jabil Circuit (I) Pvt.Ltd., Tax -8(1), Vs. Arena House, 3Rd Floor, Plot No.103, Room No.210, 2Nd Floor, Road No.12, Opp Tunga Paradise, Aayaker Bhavan, Marol, Midc, Andheri (E), M K Road, Mumbai-400093 Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aaact7548K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. Cross-Objection No.81/Mum/2010 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.5433/Mum/2009 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2003-04) Celetronix India Pvt Ltd, बनधम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax 8(1), Vs. Mumbai-400020 (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Ms.Radha K NarangFor Respondent: S/Shri Sanjiv Shah, Shailesh
Section 10ASection 10A(9)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…s Director Of Enforcement, (1969)(SC2)GJX -533-SC) (SC), in the case of Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. And Another V. Union Of India And Others (2 SCC 536) and General Finance Co. and Another V/s 7 CO No.81/M/2010 ACIT (257 ITR 338)(SC), K P Varghese Vis ITO (131 ITR 597) (SC), Allied Motors (P) Ltd Vis CIT (224 ITR 677)(SC), CIT V/s Podar Cement Pvt.Ltd and others (226 ITR 625)(SC), CIT V/s Alom Extrusions Ltd (319 ITR 306) (SC), Textile Machiner Corporation Ltd Vis CIT (107 ITR 195 (SC), CIT V/s Indian Aluminum Co.Ltd. (108 ITR 367) (SC) and ITO V/s DCM Soft (P) Ltd (115 TTJ 469) (Chennai Tribunal). 7. We have…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Shri S.K. Sethi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is jettisoned

ITA 1440/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri L.N. Malik, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Bernwal Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…r can take in to consideration the alleged short fall in consideration deemed to have been received by the appellant as appellant’s income accruing or arising on the transfer of the capital asset. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Verghese vs. CIT 131 ITR 597, while considering the provisions of section 52(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 as it then was before it was repealed, held that the Assessing officer cannot go beyond the value of consideration stated in the agreement of sale unless the Assessing Officer has evidence to show that the money over and above the stated consideration was received by the app…

DCIT, Central Circle - VII, Kolkata vs. M/S. the Hooghly Mills Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 601/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri S.Jhajharia, FCA &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
Section 40A(7)(b)

…ed income of your Petitioner Co. and in this connection reliance is placed on following case laws: (i) CBI v. v.c. Shukla & Ors, AIR 1998 SC 1406. (ii) Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT, (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC), at 723 (iii) K. P. Verghese v. ITO, Ernakulam & Anr. 131 ITR 597(SC) (iv) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT, (1980) (supra) held that: 58. The CIT-A however confirmed the order of the AO observing as follows: I have carefully considered the submission of the Ld. A.r . The assessing officer has discussed the issue in para 7 of the order. Information was received by the A.O that…