Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

166 ITD 83Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#6879 most cited

What is Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An addition to income cannot be made solely on the basis of income offered by an assessee before the Settlement Commission if there is no incriminating material. Information provided to the Settlement Commission, even if admitted under section 245D, can only be used for settlement purposes and not for other proceedings.

16

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Anantnadh Constructions and Farms · 166 ITD 83 · ITAT · Settlement Commission · section 245D · section 245D(4) · incriminating material · offer of income · addition to income · settlement of tax dispute

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 250Section 245HA(3)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 245CSection 245D(1)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 245c(1)section 245d(1)section 245hasection 245csection 136settlement applicationsection 245d(4)section 245dsection 245hsection 245income tax settlement commissionsection 32

Judgments citing Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

Smt. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

22. In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders passed by the Learned CIT(A) and the impugned orders u/s 154 of the Act passed by the ACIT deserve to be set aside

ITA 27/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 136Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 245Section 250

…efer to any incriminating material for the purpose of passing of the said orders. 17. In the above cited decision by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Jaipur Bench, reliance was placed on decision in the case of Anantanadh Construction & Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 166 ITD 83 by the Coordinate Bench ITAT, Mumbai wherein it was held that confidential information submitted before the Settlement Commission cannot be the basis of addition in the assessment proceedings in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action. 18. Admittedly, the application submitted before Settlement Co…

Smt. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

22. In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders passed by the Learned CIT(A) and the impugned orders u/s 154 of the Act passed by the ACIT deserve to be set aside

ITA 26/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 136Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 245Section 250

…efer to any incriminating material for the purpose of passing of the said orders. 17. In the above cited decision by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Jaipur Bench, reliance was placed on decision in the case of Anantanadh Construction & Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 166 ITD 83 by the Coordinate Bench ITAT, Mumbai wherein it was held that confidential information submitted before the Settlement Commission cannot be the basis of addition in the assessment proceedings in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action. 18. Admittedly, the application submitted before Settlement Co…

Smt. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

22. In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders passed by the Learned CIT(A) and the impugned orders u/s 154 of the Act passed by the ACIT deserve to be set aside

ITA 25/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 136Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 245Section 250

…efer to any incriminating material for the purpose of passing of the said orders. 17. In the above cited decision by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Jaipur Bench, reliance was placed on decision in the case of Anantanadh Construction & Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 166 ITD 83 by the Coordinate Bench ITAT, Mumbai wherein it was held that confidential information submitted before the Settlement Commission cannot be the basis of addition in the assessment proceedings in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action. 18. Admittedly, the application submitted before Settlement Co…

Smt. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

22. In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders passed by the Learned CIT(A) and the impugned orders u/s 154 of the Act passed by the ACIT deserve to be set aside

ITA 24/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 136Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 245Section 250

…efer to any incriminating material for the purpose of passing of the said orders. 17. In the above cited decision by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Jaipur Bench, reliance was placed on decision in the case of Anantanadh Construction & Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 166 ITD 83 by the Coordinate Bench ITAT, Mumbai wherein it was held that confidential information submitted before the Settlement Commission cannot be the basis of addition in the assessment proceedings in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action. 18. Admittedly, the application submitted before Settlement Co…

Smt. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

22. In view of the above discussion, the impugned orders passed by the Learned CIT(A) and the impugned orders u/s 154 of the Act passed by the ACIT deserve to be set aside

ITA 23/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 132(1)Section 136Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 245Section 250

…efer to any incriminating material for the purpose of passing of the said orders. 17. In the above cited decision by the Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Jaipur Bench, reliance was placed on decision in the case of Anantanadh Construction & Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, 166 ITD 83 by the Coordinate Bench ITAT, Mumbai wherein it was held that confidential information submitted before the Settlement Commission cannot be the basis of addition in the assessment proceedings in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action. 18. Admittedly, the application submitted before Settlement Co…

H.K. Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - CC-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 317/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

H.K. Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC - 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 316/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

H.K.Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 315/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

H.K. Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 314/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

H.K. Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 269/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

H.K. Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 268/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

H.K. Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 267/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245D(1)Section 250Section 254

…y the Assessing Officer of additional income offered in Settlement Commission for want of evidences. The same are as follows: 27. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [166 ITD 83] wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal held that no addition can be made on the basis of income offered by assessee before Settlement Commission in absence of incriminating material. Relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as below: 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under…

Mahendra Tulsidas Thakker, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Int Tax Ward-4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3885/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 148Section 250Section 254(1)Section 69A

…nd in the case of Maruti Fabrics (2014) 47 taxmann.com 298 by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, ultimately deleted the identical addition by observing and holding as under: “The ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Anantnadh Constructions & Farms (P) Ltd. vs DCIT, 166 ITD 83 while considering the identical issue held in para 13 to 19 as under: - 13. We find that assessee has made declaration and filed some information before Settlement Commission admitted under section 245D of the Act and it can be used only for limited purpose for settlement of tax dispute and passing an order under section 245D(4) of the Income Tax…

Late Shri Sawarmal Hisaria (Through L/H. Shri Sandeep Hisaria), Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, Circle-2(4), Mumbai

ITA 274/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Das, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D(1)

…red by co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of DCIT vs. Shivali Mahajan and vice-versa along with others (ITA No.5585/Del/2015 and CO 6 Late Shri Sawarmal Hisaria No.447/Del/2015 dated 19.03.2019 & Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT (166 ITD 83). 9. However, on the other hand, the Ld. D.R. for the Revenue to repel the argument addressed by the Ld. A.R. for the assessee, relied upon the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and contended that the AO was well within his right to use the material brought before the ITSC by the assessee under section 245HA(3) of the Act. 10. In the backdrop of…

A.T. Trade Overseas P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC- 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 325/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Blea.T. Trade Overseas Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Central Circle – 2(4) A-601 Cello Trihumph 802, 8Th Floor I.B. Patel Road, Goregaon (E) Pratishtha Bhavan Mumbai – 400063 Old Cgo Annexe Maharishi Karve Road Pan: Aacca7944A Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah Department By : Ms. Sailaja Rai

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Sailaja Rai
Section 132Section 245CSection 245D(1)Section 245HSection 68

…d that Assessing Officer cannot make any addition relying on voluntary disclosure of adhoc income before ITSC without there being any incriminating material. In this regard he relied on the decision of the Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd., v. DCIT [166 ITD 83]. 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR brought to our notice finding of the Ld.CIT(A) in Para No. 9.5 of the order and he accordingly, relied on the orders passed by the Tax Authorities below: - 8. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observed that subsequent to search action assessee has disclosed additional income before…

Mrs. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 708/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 837/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Acit Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 708 & 709 Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Cuke Mrs. Renu Sehgal The Dcit Vs. 227-278, Nemisagar Colony Central Circle-3, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta, Cit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2019 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm There Are Cross Appeals For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Directed Against The Order Dated 09-04-2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur. The 2 Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta, CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 51Section 68

…the income of assessee without bringing any material on record which generated such income. In support of his contention, the ld.AR of the assessee relied on the decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Anantanadh Constructions & Farms Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT ,166 ITD 83 and submitted that the Tribunal has held that confidential information submitted before the Settlement Commission cannot be a basis of addition in the assessment proceedings in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and seizure action. Thus the ld.AR of the assessee submitted that in the case of the assessee…

Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (166 ITD 83) — Cited in 16 Judgments | BharatTax