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 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 367,154 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 153A Section 132 Section 292C Section 69 Section 153C Section 115BBE Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 52 closely held company accumulated profits dumb documents section 132(4a)section 131(1a)section 260 section 69b section 292c section 292b section 292

Judgments citing K.P. Varghese v. ITO

Shri Ganga Four Wheels Private Limited, Sikar vs. Income Tax Officer, Sikar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders to cost

ITA 169/JPR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Saraswat, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 142ASection 69B

…r persons, but instead of making any inquiry or bringing any positive evidence against the assessee, they built the whole story founded on surmises and conjectures. 1.11 The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 to the effect that the burden is on the Revenue to prove that actual consideration was more than that was disclosed by the assessee. 1.12 Section 69B does not permit an inference to be drawn from the circumstances surrounding the transaction that the purchaser of the property must have paid more than what was recorded in his books of…

Muslim Education Society, Ratnagiri vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

In the result, the appeal by appellant trust stands partly allowed

ITA 845/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.845/Pun/2024

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…iry of the period of the provisional approval or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever is later; 7. 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). 8. Adverting to the facts of the present case, undisputedly, the appellant trust commenced its actual activities on 31.01.1941 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 appro…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…t be as aids to the construction of a statute, undoubtedly throw light on the intent and design of the legislature and indicate the scope and purpose of the legislation itself." It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 as under- "it is well recognized rule of construction that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible that absurdity and mischief may be avoided." If a assessee is allowed to claim a allowance, deduction etc. u/s 153A not claimed earlier than it would mean that even in cases where the appeal arising out of the completed…

Sanatana Dharma Vidyasala, Alappuzha vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kochi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 279/COCH/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR

Section 12A(1)(ac)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…

Sanatana Dharma Educational and Cultural Society, Alappuzha vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kochi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 278/COCH/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Shri Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR

Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

DCIT, Central Circle2(4), Chennai vs. S. Elambharathi, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos

ITA 221/CHNY/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B' BENCH, CHENΝΑΙ श्री एसएस विश्वनेत्र रवि, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री एस.आर. रगुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.220 and 221/Chny/2022 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 & C.O. Nos. 7 & 8/Chny/2022 [in ITA Nos. 220 and 221/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (4), Room No. B6, Investigation Building, No. 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai 34. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Shri S. Elambhara…

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai vs. Shri S. Elembharathi, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 220/CHNY/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.220 & 221/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 & C.O. Nos. 7 & 8/Chny/2022 [In Ita Nos. 220 & 221/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri S. Elambharathi, Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (4), Flat No. 5, Ground Floor, 364, Room No. B6, Investigation Building, Kurupam Court, Lloyds Road, No. 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. Chennai 34. [Pan: Aacpe3945N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: Both The Appeals & The Cross Objections Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Respectively Are Directed Against The Common Order Dated 28.01.2022 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18. 2. Since The Issue Raised In The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एसएस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद" के सम" Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.220 and 221/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 & C.O. Nos. 7 & 8/Chny/2022 [in ITA Nos. 220 and 221/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shri S. Elambharathi, Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (4), Flat No. 5, Ground Floor, 364, Room No. B6, Investigation Building, Kurupam Court, Lloyds Road, No. 46, Mahatma Gandh…

Murude Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-22(2)(1), Mumbai

The Appeal is allowed

ITA 901/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 5Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…irstly, 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…

Dtps Employees Co-Op Credit Society Limited Dahanu, Dahanu vs. Jurisdiction Ward 1, Palghar

ITA 1884/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…irstly, 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 6 ITA No. 1884/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 that the marginal note to a section cannot be referred to for the purpose of construing the se…

Savi Realty Holding Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G, Accountnat Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.140/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) M/S. Savi Realty Holding Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Circle 3(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcj0018K (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/09/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 20/09/2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, SR-DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148

…of the assessee. It is settled position of law that to tax on money, burden is on revenue to establish with cogent material that there is some under statement of the sale consideration. Reference can be made to the following judgments: a) K.P.Varghese Vs ITO 131 ITR 597(SC) b) CIT Vs P.V.Kalyan Sundram 164 Taxman 78(SC) c) CIT Vs Discovery Estate reported in 356 ITR 159(Del) 7.1 It is also settled position of law that a photocopy document cannot be made basis for making an addition in tax proceedings. Examining this issue by Hon’ble Delhi High Court recently in the case of PCIT Vs. Rashmi Raji Mehta 984 of 2019…

Megha Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Jaipur

In the result, the Appeal of the appellant stands dismissed with no orders as to cost

ITA 959/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 43C

…that unless it is proved that the sales consideration has been understated by the assessee, the sale consideration cannot be substituted by a higher amount. For this reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K.P. Varghese Vs. ITO 131 ITR 597 where at Para 18 it was held as under 4 MEGHA COLONIZERS PVT LTD VS ITO, WARD 6(2), JAIPUR 18. We must therefore, hold that sub-section (2) of s. 32 can be invoked only where the consideration for the transfer has been understated by the assexsee or in other words the consideration actually received by the assessee is more than what is declared…

Pritam Singh Charan Singh Gujjar, Nagpur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 406/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 48Section 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMC MATTER ITA no.406/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2015–16) Pretam Singh Charan Singh Gujjar Roureka Nagpur Roadways ……………. Appellant 38, Durga Complex, C.A. Road Nagpur 440 008 PAN – AEDPG2548E v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–4, Nagpur Assessee by : Shri Bhavesh Moryani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 03/09/2024 Date of Order – 18/09/2024 O R D E R The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 21/11/2023, passed by th…

Aadhar Shikshan Sanstha Yelavi, Sangli vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 748/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2024

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.748/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : N.A. Aadhar Shikshan Sanstha The Commissioner Of Yelavi, V Income Tax, Exemption, At Post Yelavi, Tal Tasgaon, S Pune. Dist. Sangli, Sangli – 416416. Pan: Aaata3972D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Smt. Deepa Khare – Ar Revenue By Shri Mirtyunjoy Barnwal – Dr Date Of Hearing 11/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 80G Of The Act, Dated 15.02.2024. The Ld.Cit(E) Dismissed The Application Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Application Is Time Barred. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground(S) Of Appeal : “1. The Id Cit Exemption Erred In Law & On Facts In Treating The Application Under Clause (Iit) Of First Proviso To Sub-Section (5) Of Section 80G As Non- Maintainable On The Ground Of Being Filed Aadhar Shikshan Sanstha Yelavi [A]

Section 10Section 11Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…und we have to interpret the relevant provisions. To interpret the provisions, we shall refer to the Budget Speech of the Hon’ble Finance Minister. 6 Aadhar Shikshan Sanstha Yelavi [A] 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…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…) (Ker); (163 ITR 659) (Karn.); (179 ITR 283) (P&H); and (230 ITR 622) (Karn.). In the following decisions courts have held that circulars are binding on the Revenue: Uco Bank Ltd. Vs CIT (237 ITR 889)(SC); Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and Dhiren Chemicals (254 ITR 554). In the following decisions courts have held that even if it is a benevolent circular it is binding on the authorities of the tax department: Navnitlal C. Jhaveri (56 ITR 198 at 203) (SC); Ellerman Lines Ltd versus CIT (82 ITR 913 at 920-1) (SC); K.P. Varghese (131 ITR 597); and UCO Bank versus CIT (237 ITR 89…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Loramitra Rath, Kairapari Kotsahi, Tangi vs. DCIT (Circle-1(1), Cuttack

The appeal is allowed

ITA 314/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Loramitra Loramitra Rath, Rath, Kairapari Kairapari Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aebpr 6065 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr

For Appellant: Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 48

…assoon & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27 (SC) 4 17 Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. vs. CLT 225 ITR 746 (SC) 2 18 Gujarat Municipal Finance Board vs. Dy. CIT (Assessment) 6 221 ITR 317 (Guj.) 19 Indermani Jatia vs. CIT 35 ITR 298 (SC) 5 K. | P. Varghese vs. ITO 131 ITR 597(SC) 20 6 K.A. Ramachar v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 25 (SC) 21 24 K.A. Ramachar v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 25 (SC) 22 5 Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain vs. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 1 (SC) 23 16 Murlidhar Himatsingka v. CIT [1966] 62 ITR 323 (SC) 24 24 Nariman B. Bharucha’s case (1981) 130 ITR 863 (Bom) 25 9 P. C. Mullick vs. CIT [1938] 6 ITR 206 (SC) 26 13 Poona Electric…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-03, Delhi vs. Brij Gopal Construction Company Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2753/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT DR

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT and SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2322/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) ITA No.2324/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Brij Gopal Construction Company (P) Ltd., vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, A-7/2, Shivaji Apartments, Sector 14, New Delhi. Rohini, Delhi – 110 085. (PAN : AADCB7702J) ITA No.2473/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) ITA No.2752/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) ITA No.2754/DEL/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) ITA Nos.2472 & 2473/DEL/2023 ITA Nos.2751 to 2754/DEL/2023 DCIT, Ce…