P Varghese v. ITO

24 CTR 358Supreme Court of India1981#4716 most cited

What is P Varghese v. ITO authority for?

The Revenue must prove that the assessee received more consideration than declared when challenging a sale transaction. The declared sale consideration is accepted unless evidence proves otherwise.

25

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Also referred to as

P Varghese v ITO · section 52(2) · declared sale consideration · burden of proof · onus on revenue · excess consideration · valuation · fair market value · Stamp Duty Value · cash credits

Judgments citing P Varghese v. ITO

ACIT 13 (3)(2), MUMBAI vs. VYAPAR INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7159/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Amarjit Singh () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Satyapraksh Singh, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 106Section 132Section 143(3)Section 150Section 153ASection 153CSection 292C

…380 (Chandigarh) 4. PCIT v. Krutika Land (P.) Ltd (2019] 103 taxmann.com 9 (SC) 5. Bansal Strips (P) Ltd 99 ITD 177 Delhi 6. Harish Daulatram Innani v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax(Inv), Cir. 11(1), Mumbai (2008] 24 SOT 541 (Mumbai) 7. K P Verghese v ITO 24 CTR 358 (SC) 8. P. R. Metrani vs. CIT (2006) 287 ITR 209 SC 9. CIT vs. Smt. P. K. Nooriahan 1999 237 ITR 570 (SC) 10. CBI Vs. V. C. Shukla & Ors. (1998) 3SCE 410 The gist submitted by the assessee of some of the cases is an under:- 1. Bhajan Das & Bros v. ACIT (2009] 119 ITD 76 ITAT (THIRD MEMBER) (Agra) In a search conducted under section 132 at resid…

NAINA SARAF,JAIPUR vs. PR.CIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 271/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 271/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Cuke Naina Saraf, Pr.Cit-2, Vs. B-93, Surya Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Aevps 4665 N Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)

…s a must before assessing any income in the hands of the buyer (or in the hands of the seller for that reason). The law on this aspect has been explained in the context of S.52(2) of the Act by the Apex Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v/s ITO & Anr. (1981) 24 CTR 358/131 ITR 597 (SC). Similar view has been taken in the case of CIT v/s Shivakami Co. (P) Ltd. (1986) 159 ITR 71 (SC) holding that unless there is evidence that more consideration than what was stated in the document of transfer was received, the declared sale consideration was to be accepted. This has been followed in CIT v/s Raja Narendra (1994) 2…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR GOYAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 456/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 226/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Dcit, Shri Krishan Kumar Goyal, बनाम Central Circle-1, Prop Sagar Enterprise, Chandigarh Scf 153, Sector 26, Grain Market, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Agipk9063H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 456/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Dcit, Shri Krishan Kumar Goyal, बनाम Central Circle-1, Prop Sagar Enterprise, Chandigarh Scf 153, Sector 26, Grain Market, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Agipk9063H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gulshan Raj, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

SH. KRISHAN KUMAR GOYAL,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 226/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 226/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Dcit, Shri Krishan Kumar Goyal, बनाम Central Circle-1, Prop Sagar Enterprise, Chandigarh Scf 153, Sector 26, Grain Market, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Agipk9063H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 456/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Dcit, Shri Krishan Kumar Goyal, बनाम Central Circle-1, Prop Sagar Enterprise, Chandigarh Scf 153, Sector 26, Grain Market, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Agipk9063H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Gulshan Raj, CIT DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

VIJAY KUMAR SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 33(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5244/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. H. S. Sidhu & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 5244/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Vijay Kumar Seth, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Flat No. 8, Vasant Enclave, Tax, Circle-33(1), New Delhi-110057 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Acxps6514Q Assessee By : Sh. Karan Kumra, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini:

For Appellant: Sh. Karan Kumra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 55A

…the DVO was illegal and void ab initio. Similar findings on the principles relied above were also made by the following cases: " Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v. Income-tax Officer 11981] 7 Taxman 13 (SC)/[1981 ] 131 ITR 597 (SC)/[1981 / 24 CTR 358 (SC) " Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt. Shakuntala Devi [2009] 316 ITR 46 (Delhi)/[2009] 224 CTR 79 (Delhi) " Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Manoj Jain [2007] 9 Vijay Kumar Seth 163 Taxman 223 (Delhi)/[2006] 287 ITR 285 (Delhi)/[2006] 200 CTR 327 (Delhi) 11. It…

M/S RPA DEVELOPERS,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-III, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 1026/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Sh. Pankaj Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Sinha, CIT DR alongwith
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250(6)Section 3Section 36(1)(iii)Section 72

…the course of search or requisition of ITA Nos. 1022 to 1026/Chd/2017- M/s RPA Developers, Ludhiana documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

SH. DINESH DUA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly

ITA 395/CHANDI/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24

…476/Chd/2017 & 378, 379 & 395/Chd/2016- Dinesh Dua, Delhi 6 the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CI…

SH.DINESH DUA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly

ITA 379/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24

…476/Chd/2017 & 378, 379 & 395/Chd/2016- Dinesh Dua, Delhi 6 the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CI…

SHRI DINESH DUA,DELHI vs. DCIT, CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly

ITA 378/CHANDI/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. Bhasin, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 24

…476/Chd/2017 & 378, 379 & 395/Chd/2016- Dinesh Dua, Delhi 6 the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CI…

INDER SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 3727/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. S. K. Yadav & Sh. Prashant Maharishiinder Singh Vs Ito 94, Village Goela Khurd Ward-43(3) New Delhi New Delhi Bcrps3678G (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Ca Respondent By Sh. S. L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 23.08.2018

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 263Section 68Section 69B

…CIT V s. Rashmi Chauhan, ITA No. 1831120 (2) 1 0 decided on 26-11- 2010 (Del- HC) (page 45 to 47), CIT Vs. Lahsa Construction (P.) Ltd., 357ITR 671 (3) 17 Inder Singh V ITO A Y 2009-10 (Del), K. P. Varghese V. ITO. (1981) 7 Taxman 13 (4) (SC) = (1981) 24 CTR 358 =(1981) 131 ITR 597. (5) CIT v. Naresh Khattar (HUF), (2003) 261 ITR 664 (DEL) (2003) 183 CTR 317: “Therefore. if the Revenue seeks to hold that the assessee has received more than what has been declared by him in respect of the assessment in question, the onus would lie on the Revenue to prove this fact by bringing seme material on record." "We…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SAB UDYOG LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 980/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Mona Mohanti, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

…ing the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the ITA Nos. 979 & 980/Chd/2078- M/s Sab Udyog, Chandigarh 7 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE II, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SAB UDYOG LIMITED, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 979/CHANDI/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Smt. Mona Mohanti, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153A

…ing the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the ITA Nos. 979 & 980/Chd/2078- M/s Sab Udyog, Chandigarh 7 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

SH. SANJEEV BHARADWAJ,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessees are

ITA 485/CHANDI/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Proxy CounselFor Respondent: Shri Surinder Meena, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

SH. SANJEEV BHARADWAJ,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessees are

ITA 483/CHANDI/2014[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jul 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Proxy CounselFor Respondent: Shri Surinder Meena, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

SMT. SHALU SOOD,INDORE vs. DCIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are

ITA 209/CHANDI/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr.B.R.R.Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil GoyalFor Respondent: Shri Manu Malik, CIT
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

SUMANLATA BANSAL,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 8, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the ld

ITA 6541/MUM/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2017AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…during the course of search or requisition of ITA No.6541 to 6546/Mum/2012 12 Smt. Sumanlata Bansal documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

MRS. SUMANLATA BANSAL,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CEN CIR-8, MUMBAI

In the result appeals bearing No

ITA 530/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2004-2005

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashok D. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Srivastava, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

MRS. SUMANLATA BANSAL,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CEN CIR-8, MUMBAI

In the result appeals bearing No

ITA 529/MUM/2008[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2003-2004

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashok D. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Srivastava, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

MRS. SUMANLATA BANSAL,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CEN CIR-8, MUMBAI

In the result appeals bearing No

ITA 528/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2002-2003

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashok D. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Srivastava, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

MRS. SUMANLATA BANSAL,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT CEN CIR-8, MUMBAI

In the result appeals bearing No

ITA 527/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2001-2002

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashok D. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.D. Srivastava, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…d only on the basis of the incriminating material found during the course of search or requisition of documents. The Hon’ble High Court while reproducing the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “K P Varghese v. ITO” (1981) 24 CTR 358 “that it is recognized rule of construction that a statutory proviso must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided” has observed that if the argument of the counsel for the assessee was to be accepted, it would mean that even in case where the appeal arises out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT…

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2