Case LawHigh Court › Itr/1/2008 Of M/S.upasana Hospital & Nur...

Itr/1/2008 Of M/S.upasana Hospital & Nursing Home v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tvm

High Court 27 Feb 2009 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Itr/1/2008 Of M/S.upasana Hospital & Nursing Home v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tvm
Date of order
27 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Itr/1/2008 Of M/S.upasana Hospital & Nursing Home v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Tvm, the High Court (2009) decided the matter.

Decision: We do not find any substantial question of law arising fromthe orders of Tribunal in a matter where the dispute is only on the quantumof addition sustained.

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 K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1930 ITR.No. 1 of 2008() ------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA.513/COCH/1992 IN RA.225/COCH/1995 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPLICANT: ------------- M/S.UPASANA HOSPITAL & NURSING HOME, QUILON. RESPONDENT: ---------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX THIS TAX REFERENCE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/02/2009, ALONG WITH ITR NOS.2/08 & 3/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T.R. Nos. 1, 2 & 3 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Dated this the 27[th] day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair,J. The Tribunal has referred these cases pertaining to the assessmentyears 1983-84, 1984-85 and 1985-86 at the instance of the assessee. Inspite of service of notice, the assessee has not entered appearance incourt. Therefore, we have gone through the orders and proceed to disposeof the reference cases. 2. On going through the reference order itself, we find that thequestion raised pertains to addition of unexplained investments in the formof purchase of hospital equipments valuing Rs.4,89,948/-. Assessee'scase is that as against this amount addition to be sustained is onlyRs.62,046/-. We do not find any substantial question of law arising fromthe orders of Tribunal in a matter where the dispute is only on the quantumof addition sustained. We, therefore, dispose of the reference order bydeclining to answer the question referred. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge. (K. SURENDRA MOHAN) 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