{"id":53783,"date":"2001-11-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-11-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001"},"modified":"2016-01-31T18:24:54","modified_gmt":"2016-01-31T12:54:54","slug":"upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001","title":{"rendered":"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2002 253 ITR 507 Ker<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: C N Nair<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: P Balasubramanyan, C R Nair<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p> C. N. Ramachandran  Nair,  J. <\/p>\n<p> 1. The income-tax reference case is about the validity of a rectification order passed by the Income-tax Officer under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1986-87. The<br \/>\nquestion referred by the Tribunal at the instance of the assessee is the following :\n<\/p>\n<p>  &#8220;Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the validity of the order under Section 154 dated April 30, 1990, as an order of rectification in respect of a mistake apparent on record ?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p> 2. The assessee is a partnership firm running a nursing home at Quilon. The business premises of the assessee, and the residential premises of the partners and employees were searched by the Income-tax Department on December 19, 1985, recovering cash, deposit receipts, promissory notes, etc. In the assessment pursuant to search for the assessment year 1986-87 completed on March 17,1989, the income was assessed at Rs. 24,55,780, which included an addition of Rs. 11,67,000. Out of the addition of Rs. 11,67,000, Rs. 8,86,000 was offered by the assessee representing unaccounted cash, promissory notes, bank deposits, etc., recovered on search. Though the assessee had constructed a hospital building, and the cost of investment accounted by the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer did not make addition on account of unexplained investment for the assessment year 1986-87 in the assessment order dated March 17, 1989. The Income-tax Officer determined the cost of investment in the hospital building at Rs. 76,42,000 as against Rs. 53,36,000 accounted by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer proposed an addition of Rs. 22,56,000 towards unexplained investment for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1986-87. However, when the assessment was in fact completed, the Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained investment towards cost of building only for the three assessment years 1983-84 to 1985-86. These three assessments were contested in appeal before the first appellate authority who reduced the addition on account of unexplained investment to Rs. 19 lakhs. On further appeals, and in miscellaneous petitions, the Tribunal finally reduced the addition on account of unexplained investment to Rs. 5,07,936 with a direction to the Assessing Officer to apportion the same for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1986-87. Thereupon, the assessments were modified. The assessee has also no dispute with regard to the unexplained expenditure finally sustained by the Tribunal. There is also no dispute by the assessee in respect of the addition apportioned and made for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1985-86, because those were assessments pending in appeal before the Tribunal and revisions were carried out consequent upon the Tribunal&#8217;s ultimate order. However, the assessee questioned the validity of the addition representing unexplained investment sustained by the Tribunal for the assessment year 1986-87 on the ground that the said addition made by rectification of the assessment for the assessment year 1986-87 originally completed on March 17, 1989, was without jurisdiction. In fact under the order dated April 30, 1990, the addition made on account of unexplained investment in the building for the assessment year<br \/>\n1986-87 was Rs. 4,87,587. An appeal was filed by the assessee against this<br \/>\norder apparently issued under Section 154 of the Act. The Commissioner of<br \/>\nIncome-tax (Appeals) pointed out that the addition made on the basis of the<br \/>\norder of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment years 1983-84<br \/>\nto 1985-86 has to be modified in view of the subsequent order of the Tribunal<br \/>\nin a miscellaneous petition filed thereafter, under which the addition was<br \/>\nreduced from Rs. 4,87,587 to Rs. 93,209. The assessee filed further appeal<br \/>\nbefore the Tribunal contending that the rectification order under Section 154<br \/>\nof the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1986-87 is without jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>It was the contention of the assessee that in the original assessment made on<br \/>\nMarch 17, 1989, there was no addition on account of unexplained investment<br \/>\nin the building. According to the assessee, even though the Tribunal while<br \/>\ndisposing of the appeals for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1985-86 ultimately held that an amount of Rs. 93,209 is to be added towards unexplained<br \/>\nexpenditure in the building for the assessment year 1986-87, the Assessing<br \/>\nOfficer cannot revise the assessment under Section 154 of the Act. As there<br \/>\nwas no appeal for the assessment year 1986-87, the Assessing Officer also can<br \/>\nnot revise the assessment for the year 1986-87 pursuant to the order of the Tribunal for other years is the contention canvassed by the assessee before the<br \/>\nTribunal. However, the Tribunal held that a mistake apparent on the face of<br \/>\nthe record is not confined to the mistakes in the record of that assessment year<br \/>\nalone, but the mistake can also arise in relation to the record for other assessment years also. The Tribunal was of the view that for the purpose of treating<br \/>\nthe mistake apparent on the face of the record, the Assessing Officer can refer<br \/>\nto earlier years&#8217; assessments of the assessee. Accordingly, the Tribunal held<br \/>\nthat when the Tribunal sustained the addition on account of unexplained<br \/>\nexpenditure on the building at Rs. 5,97,936 with direction to spread over the<br \/>\nsame for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1986-87, that is a mistake in the<br \/>\noriginal assessment for 1986-87 dated March 17, 1989, with regard to non-\n<\/p>\n<p>inclusion of addition of Rs. 93,209 sustained. On this reasoning, the Tribunal<br \/>\nupheld the order. It is against mis order that the assessee got the above question referred to this court.\n<\/p>\n<p> 3. We have heard Sri C. K. Nair, counsel for- the assessee, and Sri P. K. R. Menon, senior standing counsel for the Revenue.\n<\/p>\n<p> 4. As already pointed out, the short question is whether the finding of the Tribunal that an amount of Rs. 93,209 is the addition to be made on account of unexplained expenditure in the building for the assessment year 1986-87, while disposing of the appeals for the assessment years 1983-84 to 1985-86, can give rise to a mistake in the assessment for the assessment year 1986-87 that can be rectified under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act. The assessee&#8217;s counsel contended that the assessment dated March 17, 1989, for the assessment year 1986-87 was not the subject-matter of any appeal before the<br \/>\nTribunal. Accordingly, no revision can be made by the Income-tax Officer pursuant to the appellate order of the Tribunal. The further contention of counsel for the assessee is that the mistake apparent on the face of the record should be confined to the record of the assessment year 1986-87, which does not disclose any unexplained expenditure on the building. In other words, the orders for earlier assessment years cannot be treated as record for rectification of mistake for a later assessment. On the other hand, the Revenue&#8217;s counsel contended that the record of the case is not the record of the assessment year alone, but it comprises all the proceedings in the file of the assessee available with the Department. In fact, the reliefs like depreciation on the basis of the written down value, carry forward loss, are related matters and when there is a change in one assessment consequent on appeal or revision, the same has to be carried out in the next year only by rectification. Therefore, according to counsel for the Revenue, when there is a final decision by the Tribunal sustaining the unexplained expenditure on the building for the four assessment years 1983-84 to 1986-87, with a direction to the Assessing Officer to apportion the amount for all these years, consequential orders have to be passed in respect of the assessments under appeal and for other years, the Tribunal&#8217;s order can be given effect to only by rectification proceedings under Section 154 of the Act. Apart from the above decisions relied upon by the Tribunal, counsel for the Revenue has brought to our notice the decisions of the Supreme Court in Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 ; <a href=\"\/doc\/271192\/\">T.S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers<\/a> [1971] 82 ITR 50 and <a href=\"\/doc\/274021\/\">Mahendra Mills Ltd. v. P. B. Desai, AAC<\/a> [1975] 99 ITR 135; and that of the Madras High Court in CIT v. M. R. M. Plantations P. Ltd. [1999] 240 ITR 660, all to the effect that a mistake on record is not confined to an assessment year&#8217;s file alone.\n<\/p>\n<p> 5. From the above, we find that the approach of the Tribunal is correct and the mistake arises in the assessment for the assessment year 1986-87 consequent upon changes made in the assessments for 1983-84 to 1985-86 pursuant to the Tribunal&#8217;s orders. The assessee has no dispute with regard to the ultimate amount of unexplained expenditure sustained by the Tribunal, and to the direction of the Tribunal to spread over the unexplained expenditure for the four assessment years. The only objection is that the Act vests no power on the Assessing Officer to carry out the finding of the Tribunal for the year which was not in appeal. We feel that the power of rectification under Section 154 is to be exercised with reference to the records of the assessee available with the Assessing Officer, and not with particular reference to the assessment alone. The error apparent on the face of the record cannot be said to be the record of one particular assessment, but the entire record of the assessee relating to all the assessment years. The same is the view taken by the Supreme Court and other High Courts in the decisions referred to above. Section 154 is a section under which an assessee will also get relief consequent on the<br \/>\nchanges in the earlier assessment years after appeal or revision, etc. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the contention raised by the assessee regarding the validity of the rectification order issued under Section 154 of the Act. The reference is accordingly answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 Equivalent citations: 2002 253 ITR 507 Ker Author: C N Nair Bench: P Balasubramanyan, C R Nair JUDGMENT C. N. Ramachandran Nair, J. 1. The income-tax reference case is about the validity of a rectification order passed by the [&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-53783","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 - 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\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\" \/>\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=\"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-31T12:54:54+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\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-31T12:54:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1635,\"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\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\",\"name\":\"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-31T12:54:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001\"}]},{\"@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":"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 - 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\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-31T12:54:54+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\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001","datePublished":"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-31T12:54:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001"},"wordCount":1635,"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\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001","name":"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-11-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-31T12:54:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/upasana-hospital-and-nursing-home-vs-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-22-november-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Upasana Hospital And Nursing Home vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 November, 2001"}]},{"@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\/53783","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=53783"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53783\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=53783"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=53783"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=53783"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}