SAJI VARGHESE vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM — C.A. No. 8583 - 8587/2011
Case under Direct Taxation : Income Tax Act, 1961, Wealth Tax Act, 1957, Gift Tax Act, 1958, Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, Business Profit Tax Act, 1947 [Other Than Matters Covered by Categories 1602-1605] Section XI-B. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010263142010
Filing Date
19-Aug-2010
Registration No
C.A. No. 8583 - 8587/2011
Diary Number
26314/2010
Order Date
23-Jan-2024
Document Type
Judgement - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Appeals Allowed
Last updated 06-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SAJI VARGHESE
Adv. LIZ MATHEW (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Respondent(s)
-
1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM
Adv. B. V. BALARAM DAS (Dead / Retired / Elevated) RAJ BAHADUR YADAV[R-1]
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Jan-2024
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay S. Oka and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
14-Sep-2023
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
13-Sep-2023
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
31-Aug-2023
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
24-Aug-2023
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
23-Aug-2023
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
17-Aug-2023
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
16-Aug-2023
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
26-Jul-2023
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
20-Jul-2023
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
19-Jul-2023
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
-
20-Apr-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Sep-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Sep-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
09-Jul-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Feb-2014
ROPView PDF
-
18-Feb-2014
ROPView PDF
-
29-Oct-2013
ROPView PDF
-
26-Sep-2013
ROPView PDF
-
12-Aug-2013
ROPView PDF
-
08-Aug-2013
ROPView PDF
-
07-Aug-2013
ROPView PDF
-
03-May-2013
ROPView PDF
-
11-Apr-2013
ROPView PDF
-
12-Mar-2013
ROPView PDF
-
19-Feb-2013
ROPView PDF
-
07-Feb-2013
ROPView PDF
-
04-Jan-2013
ROPView PDF
-
10-Oct-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Sep-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
27-Sep-2010
ROPView PDF
-
20-Sep-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
19-Aug-2010
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 8583 - 8587/2011
-
[ 2024 INSC 53 ]
Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF
Common Record of Proceedings — heard with connected matters
Lead case: C.A. No. 8580 - 8582/2011
Case Summary: Saji Varghese v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam Court: Supreme Court of India Citation: 2024 INSC 53 Date: 23.01.2024 Decision The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the High Court's order, restoring the Tribunal's decision that quashed the reassessment proceedings for assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92, and 1992-93. The Court held that the reassessments were unjustified as they constituted a mere "change of opinion" by the assessing officer without fresh material or specific information, violating the requirements of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Key Reasoning The Court emphasized that while an assessee must disclose all material facts during assessment, once primary facts are disclosed and accepted by the assessing officer through a completed Section 143(3) assessment, the assessing officer cannot reopen the assessment merely by subjectively reanalyzing the same facts. The reassessment was based on comparing balance sheets (including one declared unreliable by an earlier appellate order) without tangible new evidence, making it an impermissible change of opinion rather than a reopening based on fresh information. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts