Case LawHigh Court › Ita/1024/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Ita/1024/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.rajendra Prasad, Calicut

High Court 10 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/1024/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.rajendra Prasad, Calicut
Date of order
10 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/1024/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.rajendra Prasad, Calicut, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: The question raised in the departmental appeal is whether theTribunal is justified in adopting PWD valuation for valuing un-explained investment in respect of construction of a house.

Decision: Consequently appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 ITA.No. 1024 of 2009() ---------------------- ITA.136/COCH//2005 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COCHIN BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ R.RAJENDRA PRASAD, DY.TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-2. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. The question raised in the departmental appeal is whether theTribunal is justified in adopting PWD valuation for valuing un-explained investment in respect of construction of a house. Theassessing officer went by the CPWD norms. All what the Tribunal didwas to permit the assessee to adopt PWD valuation. Since in similarcases, we have taken the view that valuation under local conditions isonly what is approved by the Tribunal, because only local rates basedon local conditions are prescribed by the PWD, we do not findanything wrong in the Tribunal adopting valuation based on PWDnorms. Consequently appeal is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (C. K. ABDUL REHIM) Judge.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan