Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala

91 ITR 18Supreme Court of India1973#84 most cited

What is Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala authority for?

Admissions, whether made through entries in account books or statements, are important pieces of evidence but are not conclusive. An assessee has the right to demonstrate that an admission made by them is incorrect or can be retracted.

666

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala · 91 ITR 18 · admission not conclusive · retraction of statement · statement under section 132(4) · evidentiary value of admissions · entries in account books as evidence · proving admission incorrect · Section 68 · Section 69A

Sections most often in play

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 147Section 68Section 69ASection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

retraction of statementretracted statementstatement under section 132(4)section 158bbsection 132(4a)dumb documentssection 132(4)on-moneysection 69bloose paperspanchnamasection 158b

Judgments citing Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala

Green World Dept. Stores, Mumbai vs. I.T.O.23(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal file by the assessee is treated as partly allowed or statistical purposes

ITA 2636/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Dec 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2636/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2005-06 ) बिधम/ M/S Green World Dept Stores, Income Tax Officer, 23(2)(3), Shop No.8, Sagar Garden, Mumbai. Vs. Lbs Marg, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400080 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri N M PorwalFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Shah
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40

…g its implications on the net profit and hence the said admission should not be given cognizance of. By placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala and another (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC), the ld. AR submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is open to the assessee to show that the admission made is incorrect. Accordingly he submitted that the surrender of Rs.18.52 lakhs made by the assessee in the original assessment proceedings is very much reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case and accordingly…

Bhagirath Aggarwal

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 28 / 2012HC Delhi22 Jan 2013
For Appellant: Mr O.S. Bajpai, Sr.Adv. with Mr Piyush Kaushik, Mr ShashwatFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal and Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, sr. standing counsels
Section 132Section 132(4)

…annot resile from his earlier statement made on 10-11.11.2005 and 21.11.2005. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee also referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Pullangode Rubber Products Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala: (1973) 91 ITR 18 SC for the proposition that an admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive. It was contended that it was open to the person who made the statement to show that it was incorrect. There cannot be any doubt about this position in law, but, in the present case the appellant/assessee has not p…

Bhagirath Aggarwal

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/28/2012HC Delhi22 Jan 2013
For Appellant: Mr O.S. Bajpai, Sr.Adv. with Mr Piyush Kaushik, Mr ShashwatFor Respondent: Ms Suruchi Aggarwal and Mr Sanjeev Rajpal, sr. standing counsels
Section 132Section 132(4)

…annot resile from his earlier statement made on 10-11.11.2005 and 21.11.2005. 12. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee also referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Pullangode Rubber Products Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala: (1973) 91 ITR 18 SC for the proposition that an admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive. It was contended that it was open to the person who made the statement to show that it was incorrect. There cannot be any doubt about this position in law, but, in the present case the appellant/assessee has not p…

Ester Industries Limited

Appeals are disposed of with the

ITA/699/2007HC Delhi06 Mar 2009
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr R Santhanam, Advocate
Section 260ASection 37(2)Section 43B

…e formed the basis of additions/disallowances by the Assessing Officer. On this aspect of the matter the observations in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the 2009:DHC:784-DB case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co Ltd vs State of Kerala and Anr: (1973) 91 ITR 18 at Page 20 being apposite are extracted hereinbelow:- “It is no doubt true that entries in the account books of the assessee amount to an admission that the amount in question was laid out or expended for the cultivation, upkeep or maintenance of immature plants from which no agricultural income was derived during the previous year. An admis…

Ester Industries Limited

Appeals are disposed of with the

ITA/698/2007HC Delhi06 Mar 2009
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr R Santhanam, Advocate
Section 260ASection 37(2)Section 43B

…e formed the basis of additions/disallowances by the Assessing Officer. On this aspect of the matter the observations in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the 2009:DHC:783-DB case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co Ltd vs State of Kerala and Anr: (1973) 91 ITR 18 at Page 20 being apposite are extracted hereinbelow:- “It is no doubt true that entries in the account books of the assessee amount to an admission that the amount in question was laid out or expended for the cultivation, upkeep or maintenance of immature plants from which no agricultural income was derived during the previous year. An admis…

Ester Industries Limited

Appeals are disposed of with the

ITA/697/2007HC Delhi06 Mar 2009
For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr R Santhanam, Advocate
Section 260ASection 37(2)Section 43B

…e formed the basis of additions/disallowances by the Assessing Officer. On this aspect of the matter the observations in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the 2009:DHC:781-DB case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co Ltd vs State of Kerala and Anr: (1973) 91 ITR 18 at Page 20 being apposite are extracted hereinbelow:- “It is no doubt true that entries in the account books of the assessee amount to an admission that the amount in question was laid out or expended for the cultivation, upkeep or maintenance of immature plants from which no agricultural income was derived during the previous year. An admis…