What is Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT authority for?

An addition to income based on statements recorded during search operations under Section 132(4) is valid, and the assessee bears the burden of proving such statements incorrect to justify their deletion. The Assessing Officer can rely on such statements, a proposition affirmed by the Supreme Court's dismissal of the SLP.

How many judgments cite Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT?

144 judgments on BharatTax cite Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT (31 Taxmann.com 274), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 69C, Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 153A, Section 10(38).

Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT (31 Taxmann.com 274)

Kandathil Jewellers, Kerala vs. DCIT, Circle Ingtl. Txan, Kerala

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 874/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Feb 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Jyothison J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 133ASection 148(1)Section 44A

…tiary value of the said return/s, a legal document bearing his verification. Admission, as explained in Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala [1963] 91 ITR 18 (SC), is an extremely important piece of evidence (Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT [2013] 351 ITR 143 (Ker)). That apart, Shri Shukoor, the person managing the business and, further, looking after both it’s purchases and sales (refer answer to Q.4), per his statement dated 15/16.10.2019, admits to disclosing sales at, on an average, 85% of the actual sales and, on being confronted with evidence as to sale suppression (for the period 1/10/2019 to…

Kandathil Jewellers, Kerala vs. DCIT, Circle Ingtl. Txan, Kerala

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 873/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Jyothison J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 133ASection 148(1)Section 44A

…tiary value of the said return/s, a legal document bearing his verification. Admission, as explained in Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala [1963] 91 ITR 18 (SC), is an extremely important piece of evidence (Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT [2013] 351 ITR 143 (Ker)). That apart, Shri Shukoor, the person managing the business and, further, looking after both it’s purchases and sales (refer answer to Q.4), per his statement dated 15/16.10.2019, admits to disclosing sales at, on an average, 85% of the actual sales and, on being confronted with evidence as to sale suppression (for the period 1/10/2019 to…

Kandathil Jewellers, Kerala vs. DCIT International Taxation Circle, Trivandrum

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 872/COCH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Jyothison J., CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 133ASection 148(1)Section 44A

…tiary value of the said return/s, a legal document bearing his verification. Admission, as explained in Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs. State of Kerala [1963] 91 ITR 18 (SC), is an extremely important piece of evidence (Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT [2013] 351 ITR 143 (Ker)). That apart, Shri Shukoor, the person managing the business and, further, looking after both it’s purchases and sales (refer answer to Q.4), per his statement dated 15/16.10.2019, admits to disclosing sales at, on an average, 85% of the actual sales and, on being confronted with evidence as to sale suppression (for the period 1/10/2019 to…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) - 2 vs. Vir Sen Sindhu

ITA/1426/2018HC Delhi20 Feb 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

…e case the seized paper were shown which showed that assessee was giving cash loan to the several persons. In the present case before us there is no reference of any seized material. The second decision relied upon is in case of Bhagirath Aggarwal Vs. CIT 351 ITR 143. In that particular case the original statement made was further confirmed by the assessee by another letter. Further, there was no retraction of the statement. The courts have further held that the assessee has not produced any evidence to show that the admission made by him were incorrect. In the present case before us the assessee has de…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cen-Circle 4(1), Mumbai vs. Mr Rashmin Girdharilal Rughani, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross

ITA 2143/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

…re about his undisclosed statement during search and seizure about his undisclosed income, tax was to be income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admission without levied on the basis of admission without scrutinizing documents. scrutinizing documents. g. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: g. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: g. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013); 22.01.2013); 22.01.2013); addition addition addition in in in assessee's assessee's assessee's income income income relying relying relying on on on statements recorded duri…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cen-Circle 4(1), Mumbai vs. Mr Rashmin Girdharilal Rughani, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross

ITA 2142/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

…re about his undisclosed statement during search and seizure about his undisclosed income, tax was to be income, tax was to be levied on the basis of admission without levied on the basis of admission without scrutinizing documents. scrutinizing documents. g. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: g. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: g. 351 ITR 143 (Delhi HC); Bhagirath Aggarwal vs CIT (doj: 22.01.2013); 22.01.2013); 22.01.2013); addition addition addition in in in assessee's assessee's assessee's income income income relying relying relying on on on statements recorded duri…

DCIT Central Circle-4, New Delhi vs. Capital Power Systems Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 211/DEL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Sh. Mayank Patwari, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 150

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Ms. Astha Chandra, Judicial member ITA No. 211/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 DCIT, Vs Capital Power Systems Ltd., 3721/2, 1st Floor, Netaji Central Circle-4, New Delhi-110055 Subhash Marg, Darya Ganj, New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACC0119R Assessee by : Sh. Mayank Patwari, CA & Sh. Amol Jagga, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 29.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 06.11.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed b…

Shambhu Prasad Rastogi, Mirzapur vs. ITO, Range 3(4), Mirzapur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/ALLD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad12 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.66/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बनधम/ Shambhu Prasad Rastogi Ito, Range-3(4) Prop. M/S. Rastogi Sarraf, Aayakar Bhawan, Mahant Vs. Dhundhi Katara, Mirzapur- Shivala, Mirzapur- 231001. 231307. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aanpr8527Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Nita Goyal Revenue By: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 05/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Lucknow-03 Dated 29.03.2023 For Ay. 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Confirming The Addition Of Rs.1,84,080/- On Account Of Alleged Excess Stock-In-Trade On The Date Of Survey (I.E. On 06.01.2012).

For Appellant: Ms. Nita GoyalFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR)

Section 131Section 133A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD “SMC” BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.66/Alld/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बनधम/ Shambhu Prasad Rastogi ITO, Range-3(4) Prop. M/s. Rastogi Sarraf, Aayakar Bhawan, Mahant Vs. Dhundhi Katara, Mirzapur- Shivala, Mirzapur- 231001. 231307. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AANPR8527Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Ms. Nita Goyal Revenue by: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 05/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 12/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R…

Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1)Pune, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 725/PUN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.91 To 96/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Central Circle- Chhajed, 1(1), Pune. 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / It(Ss)A Nos.97 & 98/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Vs. Shri Manoj Madanlal Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.725/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Manoj Madanlal Vs. Acit, Circle-1(1), Pune. Chhajed, 601, A-8 Building, Karishma Housing Society, Near Sangam Press, Kothrud, Pune- 411029. Pan : Aalpc4991M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ratan SamalFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)

…in law and the retraction is not supported by any cogent material and the statement given by an assessee u/s 132(4) constitutes a prima- facie evidence placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhagirath Aggarwal vs. CIT, 351 ITR 143 (Delhi), in the case of CIT vs. M. S. Aggarwal, 93 taxmann.com 247 (Delhi) and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bannalal Jat Constructions (P.) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 413 ITR 322 (SC). Then the ld. CIT(A) had proceeded to hold that the assessee had failed to prove the genuineness of the creditors placing reliance on the decision o…