Case LawHigh Court › Ita/432/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Ita/432/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kottayam v. Shri.sajan Varghese,M/S.mangalam Publica

High Court 12 Oct 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/432/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kottayam v. Shri.sajan Varghese,M/S.mangalam Publica
Date of order
12 Oct 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Ita/432/2009 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax,Kottayam v. Shri.sajan Varghese,M/S.mangalam Publica, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: Further, valuation is only a pure question of fact and,therefore, we dismiss the departmental appeal.

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 V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 ITA.No. 432 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.264/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ SHRI.SAJAN VARGHESE, M/S.MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM. THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ....................................................................I.T. Appeal No.432 of 2009 ....................................................................Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised pertains to addition deleted by the firstappellate authority confirmed by the Tribunal based on valuation ofbuilding which is treated as unexplained investment. While departmentis relying on valuation report by the department valuer, the assessee hasrelied on Kerala P.W.D. rates. In similar cases we had taken the viewthat the valuation taken based on Kerala P.W.D. rates was rightlyaccepted by lower authorities as those rates are more relevant underlocal conditions. Further, valuation is only a pure question of fact and,therefore, we dismiss the departmental appeal. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge V.K.MOHANANJudge
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