C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar

300 ITR 152High Court2008#3180 most cited

What is C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar authority for?

Statements made during a survey under section 133A, even if a confession of additional income, are not conclusive evidence and can be retracted. Such statements cannot form the sole basis for additions in block assessment if the assessee demonstrates they are incorrect.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar · section 133A · survey · retracted statement · confession of income · block assessment · CBDT circular March 10 2003 · material collected during survey

Sections most often in play

Section 133ASection 131Section 143(3)Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 158BBSection 133(6)Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 133a(3)(iii)economic adjustmentsection 158bbretraction of statementsurvey under section 133asurrender of incomeworking capital adjustmentsection 80hhcretracted statementunabsorbed depreciationsection 158bsection 158

Judgments citing C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Kanpur vs. Shri.Mohammad Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 144/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…284 ITR 220 (Mad.) ; (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive p…

Mohd. Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur vs. Deputi Commissioner of Income Tax CC-2, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…284 ITR 220 (Mad.) ; (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive p…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1, Coimbatore vs. Ram Battery India Private Limited, Erode

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue in ITA No

ITA 1167/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1167/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21 V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ram Battery India Private Tax, Limited, Central Circle-1, No.406, Perundurai Road, Coimbatore Erode, Tamil Nadu- 638 009. [Pan: Aagcr3898A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Co No.37/Chny/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Ram Battery India Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of No.406, Perundurai Road, Erode, Income Tax, Tamil Nadu- 638 009. Central Circle-1, [Pan: Aagcr3898A] Coimbatore (अपीलार्थी/Cross Objector/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) : अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant By Ms. R.Anitha, Addl. Cit. : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent By Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) For Cross Objector / Respondent सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri, Jm: This Is An Appeal (Ita No.1167/Chny/2025) Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)

Section 131Section 133A

…nian [2013] 33 taxmann.com 130 (Madras)/[2013] 215 Taxman 288 (Madras) held as under: 15. After elaborately referring to the decisions of Paul Mathews & Sons (supra); CIT v. G.K Senniappan [2006] 284 ITR 220/155 Taxman 118 (Mad.) and CIT v. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.) and the Circular of the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated March 10, 2003 with regard to confession statement of additional income during the course of search and seizure and survey operations, the Division Bench of this Court in CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son [2008] 300 ITR 157 (Mad.) has summarised the principles as under: ITA No.1167 & CO-…

Krishnamurthy L/R by Smt. Nagarathnamma, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 569/BANG/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 133ASection 234A

…builder could be used in the block assessment of the assessee, came up for consideration before this Division Bench in an unreported case in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006, this court, by order dated November 22, 2006—since reported in CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152, of course, following the, earlier decision of this court in G.K. Senniappan's case reported in [2006] 284 ITR 220, while confirming the order of the Tribunal, answered the question in favour of the assessee, in limine. What is more relevant, in the instant case, is that the attention of the Commissioner and the Tribunal was rightly invited to th…

Krishnamurthy L/R by Smt. Nagarathnamma, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 568/BANG/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar S. V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 133ASection 234A

…builder could be used in the block assessment of the assessee, came up for consideration before this Division Bench in an unreported case in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006, this court, by order dated November 22, 2006—since reported in CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152, of course, following the, earlier decision of this court in G.K. Senniappan's case reported in [2006] 284 ITR 220, while confirming the order of the Tribunal, answered the question in favour of the assessee, in limine. What is more relevant, in the instant case, is that the attention of the Commissioner and the Tribunal was rightly invited to th…

Shailesh Goyal, Tonk vs. ACIT, Centre Circle Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 496/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

…284 ITR 220 (Mad.) ; (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.) ; (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive…

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Rakesh Goel, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1204/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 133Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…284 ITR 220 (Mad.) ; (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.); (v) Finally, the word “may” used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., “record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive p…

Rajesh Kumar Poonia, Jhunjhunu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 623/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vedant Agrawal, Adv. (V.C)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Add. CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 611 & 623/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18 cuke Rajesh Kumar Poonia ACIT, Vs. S/o Ishwar Singh Poonia Thirpali Circle-Jhunjhunu, Chooti, Thirpali Bapi Rajgarh, Jhunjhunu Churu LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BRXPK 6775 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh.…

Rajesh Kumar Poonia, Jhunjhunu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhunjhunu

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 611/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vedant Agrawal, Adv. (V.C)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh, Add. CIT-DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 611 & 623/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18 cuke Rajesh Kumar Poonia ACIT, Vs. S/o Ishwar Singh Poonia Thirpali Circle-Jhunjhunu, Chooti, Thirpali Bapi Rajgarh, Jhunjhunu Churu LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BRXPK 6775 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh.…

B. Narayan & Associates, Thane vs. ITO WD 1(3), Thane

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

ITA 5107/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Athavale, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 131

…6) 284 ITR 220 (Mad); (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(ii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act, as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 1334 are not conclusive piec…

ACIT (OSD) Corporate Range 1, Chennai vs. Dong A India Automotive Private Limited, Kancheepuram

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 1365/CHNY/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

…this Tribunal rendered in Owens Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [ITA No. 8522/Mum/2011] &Cash Edge (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s ITO [IT A No.64/Del/2015] coupled with the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Apollo Tyres 255 ITR 273, Malayalam Manorama 300 ITR 152 &HCL Comnet Systems and Services Ltd. 305 ITR 409. 8.2 After careful perusal of cited judicial decisions, we concur with the submissions made by Ld. AR. The relevant observations of co-oridnate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in Owens Corning (India} Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [supra], for ease of reference, could be extracted in the following manner: 4.1. The…

Dong-A India Automotive Pvt Limited, Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 360/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

…this Tribunal rendered in Owens Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [ITA No. 8522/Mum/2011] &Cash Edge (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s ITO [IT A No.64/Del/2015] coupled with the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Apollo Tyres 255 ITR 273, Malayalam Manorama 300 ITR 152 &HCL Comnet Systems and Services Ltd. 305 ITR 409. 8.2 After careful perusal of cited judicial decisions, we concur with the submissions made by Ld. AR. The relevant observations of co-oridnate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in Owens Corning (India} Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [supra], for ease of reference, could be extracted in the following manner: 4.1. The…

Daesung Electric India Pvt. Ltd., Thiruvallur vs. ACIT (OSD), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 585/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

…this Tribunal rendered in Owens Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [ITA No. 8522/Mum/2011] &Cash Edge (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s ITO [IT A No.64/Del/2015] coupled with the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Apollo Tyres 255 ITR 273, Malayalam Manorama 300 ITR 152 &HCL Comnet Systems and Services Ltd. 305 ITR 409. 8.2 After careful perusal of cited judicial decisions, we concur with the submissions made by Ld. AR. The relevant observations of co-oridnate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in Owens Corning (India} Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [supra], for ease of reference, could be extracted in the following manner: 4.1. The…

Komos Automotive India Pvt Ltd, Kanchipuram vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle4(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee’s in ITA No

ITA 2159/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 585/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ls Automotive India Private Limited Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Known As Daesung V. Income Tax (Osd), Electric India Pvt Ltd) Corporate Range 1, Room No. 603, 6Th Floor, No. 118, Padur Village, Thiruvelangadu Post, Wanaparthy Block, Kunnavalam V.O. No. 121, Aayakarbhavan, Thiruvallur – 631 210. Mahatma Gandhi Road, [Pan: Aakcs-1901-R] Nungamabakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.: 2159/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Komos Automotive India Pvt Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, B-10/1, Sipcot Industrial Corporate Circle 4(2), 4Th Floor, Main Building, Development Centre, Oragadam, Vaippur-A Vilalge, No. 121, Mahatma Gandhi Sriperumbudurtaluk, Road, Nungamabakkam, Kanchipuramdist – 602 105. Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Aacck-8859-N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./It(Tp)A No.: 40/Chny/2019 &

Section 115JSection 40

…this Tribunal rendered in Owens Corning (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [ITA No. 8522/Mum/2011] &Cash Edge (India) Pvt. Ltd. V/s ITO [IT A No.64/Del/2015] coupled with the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Apollo Tyres 255 ITR 273, Malayalam Manorama 300 ITR 152 &HCL Comnet Systems and Services Ltd. 305 ITR 409. 8.2 After careful perusal of cited judicial decisions, we concur with the submissions made by Ld. AR. The relevant observations of co-oridnate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in Owens Corning (India} Pvt. Ltd. V/s DCIT [supra], for ease of reference, could be extracted in the following manner: 4.1. The…

Sh. Lachhman Dass Bansal, Barnala vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Patiala

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 34/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69Section 69A

…(iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this Court in T.C. (A) No. 2620 of 2006 between Commissioner of Income Tax v. S. Ajit Kumar (2008) 300 ITR 152 (Mad); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in Section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act, as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under Section 133A are not conclusive pi…

DCIT Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Anandilal & Ganesh Podar Society, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1792/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…] 284 ITR 220 (Mad.); (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive p…

DCIT Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Anandilal & Ganesh Podar Society, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1791/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…] 284 ITR 220 (Mad.); (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive p…

DCIT Cir 1(4), Mumbai vs. Anandilal & Ganesh Podar Society, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1790/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 147

…] 284 ITR 220 (Mad.); (iv) The material or information found in the course of survey proceeding could not be a basis for making any addition in the block assessment, vide decision of this court in T. C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2008] 300 ITR 152 (Mad.); (v) Finally, the word "may" used in section 133A(3)(iii) of the Act, viz., "record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive p…

Late Shri Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora, Surat vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Surat

In the result, ground no.4 raised by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1706/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1706/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora Through, Vs. The Acit, Circle-5, L/H. Rajat Bhimsen Arora, Surat. Smt. Mamta Bhimsen Arora, A-201, Madhulika Apartment, Bhatar Road, Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acaps9230L

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1706/AHD/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora through, Vs. The ACIT, Circle-5, L/h. Rajat Bhimsen Arora, Surat. Smt. Mamta Bhimsen Arora, A-201, Madhulika Apartment, Bhatar Road, Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ACAPS9230L Assessee by Shri Akshay Modi, CA Respondent by Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) 29/12/2022 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 22/02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM:…

M/S New Viraj Housing Agency, Nagpur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the three years is allowed

ITA 183/NAG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Banthia CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 133A(3)(ia)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

…firm and it is a well settled law that the same cannot be considered as relevant material for computation of income under block assessment proceedings. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: 1) G.K Senniappan 284 ITR 220 (MAD HC) 2) Ajit Kumar (2008) 300 ITR 152(MAD HC) 9 ITA183/NAG/2017 NEW VIRAJ HOUSING AGENCY VS ACIT , C.C. 1(1), NAGPUR Thus, at no point of time, the appellant firm, was ever subjected to search proceedings u/s 132 and the appellant firm not being a person searched, notice u/s 153A served on it was invalid and assessment orders framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A in consequence thereof fo…

C (A) No. 2620 of 2006 (between CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar (300 ITR 152) — Cited in 37 Judgments | BharatTax