Ahd.) 59 TTJ 418 Hiralal Maganlal & Co. v. DCIT (ITAT, Mum.)

207 CTR 196Reported decision#19828 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 133A Section 115 Section 132 Section 132(3)Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 250 Section 271AAA

Judgments citing Ahd.) 59 TTJ 418 Hiralal Maganlal & Co. v. DCIT (ITAT, Mum.)

Harsh Deep Burman, Nawada vs. Ac/Dc, Ac/Dc Circle Two

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 501/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vimlesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manab Adak, JCIT

Section 133Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69

…are afterthought. He further observed that the assessee is not objected before the authority, who was taken the statement u/s 133(A) of the Act and he relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Airport Authority of India Vs. CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196, wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that for retraction to be valid threat or coercion has to be proved but hear in the case the assessee has not proved in light of the judgement cited supra, the AO further noted that the payment of Rs. 10 lacs has not been paid by Nitu Kumari and Asha Devi from their respective bank account. During the co…

Sh. Sanjay Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2765/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Shri Sanjay Jain, Dcit, Cc-01, I-42, Ashok Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 Vs Pan-Aagpj1372G Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Adv. Shri Shyam Sunder, Adv. & Shri Dishant Seth, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2025

Section 132Section 132(4)

…TD 55 Paramanand Builders vs ITO (ITAT, Mum.) 59 ITD 29 Works of Art (P) Ltd. vs ACIT (ITAT, Jp.) 65 ITD 40 Amrital Bhagwandas Soni vs DCIT (ITAT, Ahd.) 59 TTJ 418 Hiralal Maganlal & Co. vs DCIT (ITAT, Mum.) 96 ITD 113 Airport Authority of India vs CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196 Ravindra D. Trivedi vs CIT (Raj.) 215 CTR 313 D. When statement was made voluntary and was not alleged to have been obtained under threat or coercion, onus was on assessee to prove that said declaration was made under any misconception of facts - Since assessee had not taken any steps to rectify its declaration before authorities before whom such…

A.S.Chinmai, Hassan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Hassan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3434/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member Ita No.3434(Bang)/2018 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Shri A.S.Chinmai, Prop: Sri Kanaka Jewellers, B.M.Road, Hassan Pan No.Aftpc1672C Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Vijayanagar, Belur Road, Hassan Respondent Appellant By : Shri B. Sharath Kumar, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Siddappajji, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Shri B. Sharath Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Siddappajji, Addl.CIT

Section 133A

…TO (ITA T, Mum) 59 LTD 29 (iii) Works of Art (P) Ltd., Vs. A CIT (ITA 7; Jp) 65 LTD 40 (iv) Amritla/ Bhagwandas Son! Vs. DCIT (ITA 7; Ahd) 59 Ti] 418 (v) I-/ira/al Magan/al & Co., Vs. DCIT(ITA 7; Mum) 96 IT!) 113 (vi) Airport Authority of India Vs. CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196 (v/i) Ravindra D. Tr/ved/ Vs. UT(Raj) 215 CTR 313 • An admission is the best evidence that an opposing party can rely upon and though not conclusive, is decisive of the matter, unless successfully withdrawn or proved erroneous. (i) Narayan Bhagwantrao Gosavi Batajiwale Vs. Gopal ALT 1960 Sc 100 (ii) Prana v Construction Co. Vs. A CIT (ITA T, Mum)…

Sajjan Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1458/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

…Builders Vs ITO ( ITAT, Mum) 59 ITO 29 C. Work of Art Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT ( ITAT, Jp ) 65 ITO 40 d. Amritlal Bhagwandas Soni Vs DCIT ( ITAT, Ahd) 59 TTJ 418 e. Hiralal Maganlal & Co. Vs DCIIT (ITAT, Mum) 96 ITD 113 f. Airport Authority of India Vs CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196 g. Ravindra D Trivedi Vs CIT (Raj) 215 CTR 313 5. In the case at hand, I find that the appellant has unable to bring on record even an iota of evidence that. the statement was improperly procured from him, or that any coercion or duress was used against him. 6. In my considered view the disclosure was against specific incriminating documents,…