Case Law › High Court › Ita/247/2002 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Ita/247/2002 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax,Tsr v. V.k.asokan,Sreelakshmi Road,Tsr

High Court 31 Mar 2008 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · highcourtofkerala

Parties

Date of order

31 Mar 2008

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/247/2002 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax,Tsr v. V.k.asokan,Sreelakshmi Road,Tsr, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: The common question raised is whether the Tribunal is justified inconfirming deletion of profit estimated on unaccounted quantity of arrackalleged to have been purchased and sold by the respondent-assessee.

Decision: We accordingly dismiss theappeals.

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 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 ITA.No. 247 of 2002() --------------------- ITA.380(COCH)/1998 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/APPELLANT: ------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL,GOI(TAXES) SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT: ------------------------ V.K.ASOKAN, SREELEKSHMI, BENT ROAD, TRICHUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) SRI.K.S.MENON (K) SRI.R.AMRITHARAJ THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2008, AONG WITH ITA NO. 284 OF 2002, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. .................................................................... I.T.Appeal Nos.247 & 284 of 2002....................................................................Dated this the 31st day of March, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. The common question raised is whether the Tribunal is justified inconfirming deletion of profit estimated on unaccounted quantity of arrackalleged to have been purchased and sold by the respondent-assessee. Wefind that the sole reason for making addition is inflation in sale price by theassessee. Though it could be quite logical to assume that assessee inflatedsale price to cover up unaccounted purchase and sales, we do not think itwill have effect of tax evasion in as much as full sale price is accounted bythe assessee. Since no case of unaccounted sale or purchase is proved, theC.I.T.(Appeals) deleted the addition with some modification. The Tribunalhas only confirmed the same. We do not find any substantial question oflaw arising from the order of the Tribunal. We accordingly dismiss theappeals. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge

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.