Case LawHigh Court › Ita/606/2009 Of C.p.abdulrahiman,Theyyam...

Ita/606/2009 Of C.p.abdulrahiman,Theyyampattil Jewellery v. Commissioner Of Income Tax,Calicut

High Court 08 Dec 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/606/2009 Of C.p.abdulrahiman,Theyyampattil Jewellery v. Commissioner Of Income Tax,Calicut
Date of order
08 Dec 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Ita/606/2009 Of C.p.abdulrahiman,Theyyampattil Jewellery v. Commissioner Of Income Tax,Calicut, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Decision: Consequently appeal is dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 ITA.No. 606 of 2009() --------------------- ITA.122/COCH/2004 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- C.P.ABDULRAHIMAN, THETTANPATTIL JEWELLERY, PUTHANATHNI, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALICUT. ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. .................................................................... I.T. Appeal No.606 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel appearing for the appellant and Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent. Appellant-assessee was engaged injewellery business in three towns in Malappuram District. Pursuant toa search, block assessment was made, which though was reduced inappeal, was confirmed by the Tribunal on departmental appeal, againstwhich this appeal is filed by the assessee. 2. Counsel contended that the entire credit sales found as income is not tenable. Even though there is logic in the argument thatunaccounted turnover should not be treated as business income, wenotice that substantial amount of cash was found at the time of searchand the stock held by the assessee is substantial quantity of goldjewellery. The finding of the Tribunal essentially pertains toestimation of income based on materials seized on search. We do not find any substantial question of law arising from the order of theTribunal. Consequently appeal is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJudge pms 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