State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty

60 ITR 239Supreme Court of India1966#1459 most cited

What is State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty authority for?

A best judgment assessment must be based on wisdom, truth, and legal principles, not arbitrary caprice. While it involves estimation and guesswork, this must have a reasonable nexus to available material and the case's circumstances.

78

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

State of Kerala v C. Velukutty · 60 ITR 239 · best judgment assessment · estimation · arbitrary caprice · reasonable nexus · available material · settled principles of justice · guesswork

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 40A(3)Section 115BBESection 143(3)Section 144Section 194-IA

Issues it is cited on

section 69dsection 147(1)trade creditorsbogus share capitalsection 80a(5)section 153a(1)(b)best judgment assessmentsanctioning authoritysection 69bmistake apparent from recordrejection of books of accountsection 271f

Judgments citing State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty

M/S. Matha Enterprises, Angamally vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 304/COCH/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Dec 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &Shri George George K, Jm

For Respondent: Sri. Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR)

…) relied on the following judicial pronouncements: 1. State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690(SC) 2.RamdasJuganiv.CIT (2006) 282 ITR 356 (MP) 3.CTT v. LaxminarainBadridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) 4.State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239(SC) M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 9.6 According to the CIT(A), a fair and judicious attempt needed to be made in such set of circumstances to arrive at real income earned by the assessee out of such unaccounted business activity as held by various courts from time…

M/S. Matha Enterprises, Angamally vs. ACIT, Ernakulam

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 303/COCH/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Dec 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &Shri George George K, Jm

For Respondent: Sri. Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR)

…) relied on the following judicial pronouncements: 1. State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690(SC) 2.RamdasJuganiv.CIT (2006) 282 ITR 356 (MP) 3.CTT v. LaxminarainBadridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) 4.State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239(SC) M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 9.6 According to the CIT(A), a fair and judicious attempt needed to be made in such set of circumstances to arrive at real income earned by the assessee out of such unaccounted business activity as held by various courts from time…

DCIT, Ernakulam vs. Matha Enterprises, Angamally

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 269/COCH/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Dec 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am &Shri George George K, Jm

For Respondent: Sri. Sudhanshu Shekhar Jha, CIT(DR)

…) relied on the following judicial pronouncements: 1. State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690(SC) 2.RamdasJuganiv.CIT (2006) 282 ITR 356 (MP) 3.CTT v. LaxminarainBadridas (1937) 5 ITR 170 (PC) 4.State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239(SC) M/s.Best Bakery & Ice Cream Parlour. ITA Nos. 302 to 308/Coch/2010 & 269 to 275/coch/2010 M/s. Matha Enterprises. 9.6 According to the CIT(A), a fair and judicious attempt needed to be made in such set of circumstances to arrive at real income earned by the assessee out of such unaccounted business activity as held by various courts from time…

R.K.Madhani & Co., Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15

ITA 1471/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2014-15 R.K. Madhani & Co, The Dy. Commissioner Of 127-136, Income Tax, Madhani Estate, 542 Central Circle 8(1), Senapati Bapat Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Dadar (W), Karve Road, Mumbai - 400028 Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaaefr6706J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anant N. Pai (Ar) Revenue By : Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/12/2019

For Appellant: Shri Anant N. Pai (AR)For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)
Section 142Section 143Section 144

…een following the accounting standards. In the present case, the Ld. CIT (A) has not pointed out the reason for rejecting the books of account. The Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (SC), State of Orisa vs. Maharaja Shri V.P Deo 76 ITR 690 (SC) and Brijbhushan Lal Praduman Kumar vs. CIT 115 ITR 524 (SC), in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that while making best judgment assessment, the authority must take an honest and fair estimate of income of the assessee and same must not be capricious but should have reasonable…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd, Raipur

In the result, cross objections preferred by the assessee in CO

ITA 233/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.232 To 235/Rpr/2014 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar
Section 132

…timate; and though there must necessarily be guess-work in the matter, it must be honest CO Nos.32 to 35/RPR/2015 A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2012-13 guess-work.” These observations received the imprimatur of the Supreme Court in State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) in the following words : “The Privy Council, while recognizing that an assessment made by an officer to the best of his judgment involved some guess-work, emphasized that he must exercise his judgment after taking into consideration the relevant material.” Identical observations made by the Judicial Committee in Seth Gurmukh Singh vs. CIT (19…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd, Raipur

In the result, cross objections preferred by the assessee in CO

ITA 232/BIL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur07 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.232 To 235/Rpr/2014 धनधाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 To 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar
Section 132

…timate; and though there must necessarily be guess-work in the matter, it must be honest CO Nos.32 to 35/RPR/2015 A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2012-13 guess-work.” These observations received the imprimatur of the Supreme Court in State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) in the following words : “The Privy Council, while recognizing that an assessment made by an officer to the best of his judgment involved some guess-work, emphasized that he must exercise his judgment after taking into consideration the relevant material.” Identical observations made by the Judicial Committee in Seth Gurmukh Singh vs. CIT (19…

M/S. Valentine Cine Vision Limited, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2438/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR
Section 43B

…ts in the books of account while ignoring the book results…The ratio of the judgments in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC); Raghubir Mandal Harihar Mandal v. State of Bihar [1957] 8 STC 770 (SC); State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty [1966] 60 ITR 239 (SC); State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo [1970] 76 ITR 690 (SC); Brij Bhusan Lal Parduman 12 ITA 2419, CO 181, ITA 2438/Ahd/2015 Kumar v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 524 (SC); Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam); R.V.S. and Sons Dairy Farm v. CIT [2002] 257 ITR 764 (Mad); International Forest Co. v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 721 (J…

ITO 15(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Luxtra Realtors P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6202/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Ito-15(2)(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S. Luxora Realtors Pvt.Ltd., Room No.802, 8Th Floor Soham House, Hari Om Nagar Old Cgo Building Off. Eastern Express Highway M.K.Road, Near Checknaka Mumbai – 400 020 Mulund (E), Mumbai- 400081 Pan/Gir No.Aabco3197J (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 68

…te law that the AO cannot brush aside the evidences submitted during assessment proceedings 7 M/s. Luxbra Realtors P. Ltd. and make additions on mere whims and fancies. Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty Co. [1966] 60 ITR 239 has held that the judgment is a faculty to decide the matters with wisdom truly and legally and not to depend on the arbitrary caprice of a Judge, but on settled and invariable-principles of justice. 2.4.8 Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumarv. State of U.P. AIR 1970 SC 1302 has observed as under: "Recording o…

The ITO, Ward-4(4), Surat vs. M/S. Valentine Cine Vision Limited, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2419/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.P.K. Panda, Sr. DR
Section 43B

…ts in the books of account while ignoring the book results…The ratio of the judgments in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC); Raghubir Mandal Harihar Mandal v. State of Bihar [1957] 8 STC 770 (SC); State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty [1966] 60 ITR 239 (SC); State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo [1970] 76 ITR 690 (SC); Brij Bhusan Lal Parduman 12 ITA 2419, CO 181, ITA 2438/Ahd/2015 Kumar v. CIT [1978] 115 ITR 524 (SC); Chouthmal Agarwalla v. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 262 (Assam); R.V.S. and Sons Dairy Farm v. CIT [2002] 257 ITR 764 (Mad); International Forest Co. v. CIT [1975] 101 ITR 721 (J…

Bholanath R.Shukla, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-2, Thane

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 4505/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…Lal Parduman Kumar Vs CIT (1978) 115 ITR 524 (SC) that the authority making the best judgment assessment must make an honest and fair estimate of income of the assessee. Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of State of Kerala Vs C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) has laid down that best judgment is a faculty to decide matters with wisdom truly and legally; judgment does not depend upon the arbitrary caprice of a judge but settled invariable principles of justices; though there is an element of guess work in best judgment assessment which shall not 21 Shri Bholanath R. Shukla be wild one; the default…

Hydroair Tectonics (Pcd) Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 3949/MUM/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)

…with regard to making of best judgment assessment after rejection of books of accounts. Such best judgment assessment cannot be made disregarding the materials available on record. As emphasized by the Supreme Court in State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) though there is an element of guess-work in best judgment assessment, it should not be a wild one and should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case. Likewise, it has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) : TC11R.2…

Rajkumari Singh, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 8, Mumbai

ITA 946/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 132Section 132(4)

…with regard to making of best judgment assessment after rejection of books of accounts. Such best judgment assessment cannot be made disregarding the materials available on record. As emphasized by the Supreme Court in State of Kerala vs. C. Velukutty (1966) 60 ITR 239 (SC) though there is an element of guess-work in best judgment assessment, it should not be a wild one and should have a reasonable nexus to the available material and the circumstances of each case. Likewise, it has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Maharaja Shri B.P. Singh Deo (1970) 76 ITR 690 (SC) : TC11R.2…

Zuberi Engineering Company, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 979/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

…7] 87 taxmann.com 330 (Kerala) arising thereof or material arising out of the proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) cannot make the enhancement by introducing a new source of income. He has also relied upon the following decisions: (i) State of Kerala Vs C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (SC). (ii) Order dated 26/08/2015 of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Malabar Hill Club Vs ACIT in ITA Nos. 517 & ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 8 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 518/Mum/2010m 1560/Mum/2012, 803/Mum/2010, 808/Mum/2010 and 4274/Mum/2012. (iii) Decision of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal dated 27/04/2016 in the cas…

Zuberi Engineering Company, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 978/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

…7] 87 taxmann.com 330 (Kerala) arising thereof or material arising out of the proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) cannot make the enhancement by introducing a new source of income. He has also relied upon the following decisions: (i) State of Kerala Vs C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (SC). (ii) Order dated 26/08/2015 of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Malabar Hill Club Vs ACIT in ITA Nos. 517 & ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 8 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 518/Mum/2010m 1560/Mum/2012, 803/Mum/2010, 808/Mum/2010 and 4274/Mum/2012. (iii) Decision of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal dated 27/04/2016 in the cas…

Zuberi Engineering Company, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 977/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

…7] 87 taxmann.com 330 (Kerala) arising thereof or material arising out of the proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) cannot make the enhancement by introducing a new source of income. He has also relied upon the following decisions: (i) State of Kerala Vs C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (SC). (ii) Order dated 26/08/2015 of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Malabar Hill Club Vs ACIT in ITA Nos. 517 & ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 8 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 518/Mum/2010m 1560/Mum/2012, 803/Mum/2010, 808/Mum/2010 and 4274/Mum/2012. (iii) Decision of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal dated 27/04/2016 in the cas…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. Zuberi Engineering Company, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ITA 1122/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 251Section 40

…7] 87 taxmann.com 330 (Kerala) arising thereof or material arising out of the proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) cannot make the enhancement by introducing a new source of income. He has also relied upon the following decisions: (i) State of Kerala Vs C. Velukutty 60 ITR 239 (SC). (ii) Order dated 26/08/2015 of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Malabar Hill Club Vs ACIT in ITA Nos. 517 & ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 8 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 518/Mum/2010m 1560/Mum/2012, 803/Mum/2010, 808/Mum/2010 and 4274/Mum/2012. (iii) Decision of Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal dated 27/04/2016 in the cas…

M/S. Mehta Construction Company, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 6724/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Narendra Chodhary

For Appellant: Mrs. Ranojain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143

…mate should be based on some evidence and material 8 STC 770 (SC)_ Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal V. The State of Bihar 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case) 60 ITR 239 (SC) State of Kerala C. Velukutty). In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and judicial pronouncements relied upon by the appellant, the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the books of accounts by applying section 145 (3) of the IT Act and estimating Net Profit @ 3.5%of the Gross Receipts. The addition made by the Assess…

M/S Mehta Construction Company, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee i

ITA 6857/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Narendra Chodhary

For Appellant: Mrs. Ranojain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143

…mate should be based on some evidence and material 8 STC 770 (SC)_ Raghubar Mandal Harihar Mandal V. The State of Bihar 7. Best judgment assessment to be made (estimation shall have a rational nexus to the available material and the circumstances of the case) 60 ITR 239 (SC) State of Kerala C. Velukutty). In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and judicial pronouncements relied upon by the appellant, the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the books of accounts by applying section 145 (3) of the IT Act and estimating Net Profit @ 3.5%of the Gross Receipts. The addition made by the Assess…

Idhasoft Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 15(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5139/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Idhasoft Ltd. Dcit-15(2)(1), 3, Narayan Building, Room No.357, 3Rd Floor बनाम/ 23 L. N. Road, Dadar East, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400014 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabci6090G Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit-15(2)(1), M/S Idhasoft Ltd. Room No.357, 3Rd Floor 3, Narayan Building, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 23 L. N. Road, Dadar East, Vs. M. K. Road, Mumbai-400014 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabci6090G

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…assessment proceedings. It is trite law that the AO cannot brush aside the evidences submitted during assessment proceedings and make additions on mere whims and fancies. Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty Co. [1966] 60 ITR 239 has held that the judgment is a faculty to decide the matters with wisdom truly and legally and not to depend on the arbitrary caprice of a Judge, but on settled and invariable principles of justice. 2.4.28 Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar v. State of LIP. AIR 1970 SC 1302 has observed as under: "Recordin…

ACIT, Cir.-26(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Future Distributors, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 269/KOL/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jun 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A.T. Varkey

Section 131Section 133A

…I.T.A. No 269/KOL/2017 Assessment year: 2010-2011 Page 1 of 31 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri A.T. Varkey, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 269/KOL/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,................................Appellant Circle-26(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Road (South), Kolkata-700 068 -Vs.- M/s. Future Distributors,.....................................................Respondent P-46, Hide Road Extn., Brace Bridge, Taratalla, Kolkata-700 088 [PAN: AACFF 0828 R] Appeara…