{"id":12595,"date":"2009-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009"},"modified":"2014-01-14T03:50:49","modified_gmt":"2014-01-13T22:20:49","slug":"the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nITA.No. 400 of 2009()\n\n\n1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. M\/S.MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM.\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN\n\n Dated :12\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                                                                                   C.R.\n                    C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR &amp;\n                               V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.\n               ....................................................................\n                 I.T. Appeal Nos.400,557 &amp; 558 of 2009\n               ....................................................................\n               Dated this the 12th day of October, 2009.\n\n                                      JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Ramachandran Nair, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The question raised in the connected appeals filed by the<\/p>\n<p>department for the assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 is<\/p>\n<p>whether the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the assessments<\/p>\n<p>completed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act as time barred for<\/p>\n<p>the reason that the re-assessments were not completed within four<\/p>\n<p>years from the end of the relevant assessment year in terms of the<\/p>\n<p>proviso to Section 147 of the Act. We have heard Senior Standing<\/p>\n<p>Counsel Sri.P.K.R. Menon appearing for the appellants and<\/p>\n<p>Sri.P.Balakrishnan appearing for the respondent.<\/p>\n<p>      2. The assessee is engaged in publication of newspaper,<\/p>\n<p>periodicals, etc. Assessee did not maintain any books of accounts and<\/p>\n<p>the returns for all the assessment years were filed without being<\/p>\n<p>accompanied by balance sheet and statement of accounts. From the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>extracts pertaining to the income returned by the assessee it is seen that<\/p>\n<p>even advertisement receipts are returned by the assessee on estimation<\/p>\n<p>basis obviously showing that the assessee did not maintain proper<\/p>\n<p>books of accounts.           The original assessments were, however,<\/p>\n<p>completed under Section 144 estimating the income. It is found by the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal that though the assessments were completed by estimation of<\/p>\n<p>income which is at substantial variance with the income returned,<\/p>\n<p>assessee substantially accepted the addition of Rs.1,55,15,550\/- for the<\/p>\n<p>assessment years 1989-90 to 1993-94.     After    completion     of    the<\/p>\n<p>assessments, the Assessing Officer got copies of balance sheet<\/p>\n<p>furnished by the firm to South Indian Bank which showed substantial<\/p>\n<p>increase in the capital and current accounts of the partners.        The<\/p>\n<p>Assessing Officer inferred that the increase in the capital accounts and<\/p>\n<p>current accounts of the partners of the respondent-firm is obviously<\/p>\n<p>share income from the respondent-firm which escaped assessment in<\/p>\n<p>the original assessments of the firm completed under Section 147 of the<\/p>\n<p>Act.   After issuing notice to the respondent-assessee, the original<\/p>\n<p>assessments were completed under Section 147.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      3. The assessee challenged the assessment on ground of<\/p>\n<p>limitation as well as on merits before the C.I.T.(Appeal). On facts, the<\/p>\n<p>C.I.T.(Appeal) found that the assessee had not maintained any books of<\/p>\n<p>accounts and disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for<\/p>\n<p>completion of assessments and so much so, the limitation of four years<\/p>\n<p>provided under proviso to Section 147 does not apply. He, therefore,<\/p>\n<p>rejected the plea of limitation raised by the assessee. On the merits of<\/p>\n<p>the case, he noticed that the Assessing Officer had granted excess relief<\/p>\n<p>in the estimation of income and therefore, after issuing notice to the<\/p>\n<p>assessee, he enhanced the income by some amounts. Then the assessee<\/p>\n<p>filed second appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has accepted<\/p>\n<p>the assessee&#8217;s appeals on ground of limitation and set aside the order of<\/p>\n<p>the C.I.T.(Appeal), against which these appeals are filed before us.<\/p>\n<p>      4. On going through the orders of the Tribunal, we find that<\/p>\n<p>going by their own reasoning, their finding that the assessee has<\/p>\n<p>disclosed fully and truly all material facts necessary for the completion<\/p>\n<p>of original assessment is not tenable.    Tribunal itself admits that the<\/p>\n<p>assessee was not maintaining any books of accounts. It is the further<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>finding of the Tribunal that even in the absence of full books of<\/p>\n<p>accounts, the assessee had not furnished the documents as required in<\/p>\n<p>terms of Section 139(f) of the Income Tax Act, which is as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>            &#8220;Where regular books of account are not maintained by<br \/>\n      the assessee, the return is accompanied by a statement<br \/>\n      indicating the amounts of turnover or, as the case may be,<br \/>\n      gross receipts, gross profit, expenses and net profit of the<br \/>\n      business or profession and the basis on which such amounts<br \/>\n      have been computed and also disclosing the amounts of total<br \/>\n      sundry debtors, sundry creditors, stock-in-trade and cash<br \/>\n      balance as at the end of the previous year.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In fact, the C.I.T.(Appeal) upheld the assessment as within time for the<\/p>\n<p>reason that even in the absence of regular books of accounts, the<\/p>\n<p>assessee is bound to give the information required under the above<\/p>\n<p>clause and the assessee who has not disclosed the above information<\/p>\n<p>cannot be said to have made full disclosure of all material facts<\/p>\n<p>necessary for completion of assessment. Even before the Tribunal,<\/p>\n<p>assessee has no case that the assessee had maintained books of<\/p>\n<p>accounts or furnished particulars required for the assessment in terms<\/p>\n<p>of Section 139(f) of the Act. Even though counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n<p>respondent contended that books of accounts were with the department<\/p>\n<p>after seizure, we do not think this is a ground for the Tribunal to allow<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the assessee&#8217;s appeals. Further, if books of accounts were retained by<\/p>\n<p>the department, we see no reason why assessee could not collect copies,<\/p>\n<p>prepare proper statement of accounts including Profit and Loss<\/p>\n<p>Account and Balance Sheet before the department for the purpose of<\/p>\n<p>assessment. In any case the reopening is admittedly not based on any<\/p>\n<p>information collected by the department from the seized records which<\/p>\n<p>were available at the time of assessment. On the other hand, the<\/p>\n<p>partners of the respondent-assessee submitted balance sheets of the<\/p>\n<p>respondent-assessee before the Bank which disclosed increase in<\/p>\n<p>current accounts and capital accounts of the partners which do not tally<\/p>\n<p>with the profits returned by the firm.     There is no need for us to<\/p>\n<p>consider the explanation of the partners pertaining to the increase in<\/p>\n<p>current accounts and capital accounts as not relatable to the<\/p>\n<p>unaccounted income of the firm because that is on the merits of the<\/p>\n<p>case not considered and decided by the Tribunal. The only question to<\/p>\n<p>be considered is whether the assessee had for the purpose of<\/p>\n<p>completing the original assessment made full disclosure of all material<\/p>\n<p>facts necessary for their assessment and if it is proved so, then the re-<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>assessment under Section 147 beyond four years from the end of the<\/p>\n<p>year will get time barred.\n<\/p>\n<p>      5. As already found by us, the Tribunal does not anywhere state<\/p>\n<p>in their order that the assessee had made full disclosure of all materials<\/p>\n<p>before completion of original assessment. On the other hand, even<\/p>\n<p>though original assessments were completed at substantial variance<\/p>\n<p>with the income returned on estimation basis, it is stated in the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal&#8217;s order that from 1989-90 to 1993-94 the assessee has without<\/p>\n<p>contest accepted the addition of Rs.1,55,15,550\/-.           In fact, in<\/p>\n<p>paragraph 20 of the Tribunal&#8217;s order in the argument for the assessee,<\/p>\n<p>assessee concedes that they were not maintaining formal set of books<\/p>\n<p>of accounts for preparing balance sheet. Even though assessee claimed<\/p>\n<p>that all materials necessary for completion of assessments were<\/p>\n<p>furnished by them, they have not stated what are the materials<\/p>\n<p>furnished by them for completion of original assessments. As already<\/p>\n<p>pointed out by us, they don&#8217;t have even accounts pertaining to<\/p>\n<p>advertisement receipts which is the major source of income of a<\/p>\n<p>publication company and the assessee had in fact chosen to return<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>income from advertisement on estimation basis. We notice that the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal has mixed up the limitation issue with the merits of<\/p>\n<p>assessment and without finding that the assessee has made full<\/p>\n<p>disclosure of materials for completion of assessments, the Tribunal<\/p>\n<p>declared the assessments as invalid which in our view, is not<\/p>\n<p>sustainable. In fact, in order to challenge a re-assessment on ground of<\/p>\n<p>limitation, it is for the assessee to prove that they have furnished all<\/p>\n<p>material facts necessary for completion of the original assessment.<\/p>\n<p>Section 145(1) among other things states that income from profits of<\/p>\n<p>business shall be computed in accordance with the cash, mercantile or<\/p>\n<p>any other system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee.<\/p>\n<p>Sub-section (2) of the said Section authorises the Government to<\/p>\n<p>prescribe accounting standards to be followed by assessees.      A best<\/p>\n<p>judgment assessment under Section 144 is authorised under Section<\/p>\n<p>145(3) only when the Assessing Officer is satisfied that accounts<\/p>\n<p>maintained by the assessee are not correct or complete.           Since<\/p>\n<p>business income is to be computed based on method of accounting<\/p>\n<p>followed by the assessee and based on the books of accounts<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     8<\/span><\/p>\n<p>maintained by the assessee, the assessee is required to produce the<\/p>\n<p>books of accounts and when books of accounts are not available, in our<\/p>\n<p>view, atleast minimum statements as shown in Section 139(f) should<\/p>\n<p>be made available by the assessee to the officer. An assessee who is<\/p>\n<p>required to maintain books of accounts returns income on estimation<\/p>\n<p>basis cannot claim that it has fully and truly disclosed all material facts<\/p>\n<p>required for the assessment. We do not find any material for the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal to hold that the assessee had disclosed fully and truly all<\/p>\n<p>material facts required for completion of the original assessment. We,<\/p>\n<p>therefore, allow the departmental appeals by vacating the order of the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal and remand the matter to the Tribunal to consider the case on<\/p>\n<p>merits after issuing notice to the parties.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                     C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR<br \/>\n                                     Judge<\/p>\n<p>                                     V.K.MOHANAN<br \/>\n                                     Judge<br \/>\npms<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ITA.No. 400 of 2009() 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. M\/S.MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM. &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES) For Respondent :SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN (E) The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12595","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-01-13T22:20:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\\\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-01-13T22:20:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1511,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\",\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\\\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-01-13T22:20:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\\\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-01-13T22:20:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-01-13T22:20:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009"},"wordCount":1511,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009","name":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-01-13T22:20:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-ms-mangalam-publications-on-12-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M\/S.Mangalam Publications on 12 October, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12595","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12595"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12595\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12595"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12595"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12595"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}