Case LawHigh Court › Ita/35/2011 Of V.j.varghese,Vattaparambi...

Ita/35/2011 Of V.j.varghese,Vattaparambil House,Trichur v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Thrissur

High Court 24 Feb 2012 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/35/2011 Of V.j.varghese,Vattaparambil House,Trichur v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Thrissur
Date of order
24 Feb 2012
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/35/2011 Of V.j.varghese,Vattaparambil House,Trichur v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Thrissur, the High Court (2012) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Hence we dismiss the appeal as devoid of anymerit.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

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 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/5TH PHALGUNA 1933 ITA.No. 35 of 2011 ( ) ----------------------ITA.152/COCH/2005 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH APPELLANT/RESPONDENT---------------------- V.J.VARGHESE,VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHIYYARAM PO,TRICHUR. BY ADVS.SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) SRI.K.S.MENON (K) RESPONDENT/APPELLANT: -------------- 1 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRICHUR-680 001. BY SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER.ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL ORDER DT.4.3.2005 OF THE COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V, KOCHI. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE APPELLANTE ORDER DT.29.10.2010 OF THEINCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH. ANNEXURE D: TRUE COPY OF ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(2) DT.12.11.2011. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ. ....................................................................I.T. Appeal No.35 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 24th day of February, 2012. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel for the appellant and Standing Counsel forrespondent. After hearing both sides and after going through the ordersimpugned, what we notice is that none of the questions raised is asubstantial question of law because those pertain to unexplained cashcredit additions and claim of bad debt which are sustained by theTribunal based on evidence obtained pursuant to search. Since thequestions raised are on findings of fact, no substantial question of lawarises for consideration. Hence we dismiss the appeal as devoid of anymerit. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPHJudge
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