What is Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

When a statement is made voluntarily and not under coercion, and the assessee fails to take steps to rectify it before the relevant authorities, the retraction of such a statement later is not valid.

How many judgments cite Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT?

37 judgments on BharatTax cite Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (108 ITD 142), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 133A, Section 115, Section 132, Section 132(3), Section 132(4), Section 143(3).

Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (108 ITD 142)

SHRI SUBHASH KUMAR AAHI,SATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 24/JAB/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Nikhil Choudhary

For Respondent: Shri N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR 1

Section 143(3)Section 250

…f of fact or law and in the case of retraction being given long after it was given, the AO was justified in not accepting the retraction. Learned CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of the ITAT Bangalore of the ‘Carpenter Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. v. DCIT’, 108 ITD 142 and relying upon the same, he dismissed the assessee’s appeal against the additions made by the AO by rejecting his retraction. He also chose to confirm the addition made on account of the gross profit and surrender stock on the ground that the assessee during the course of assessment proceeding as well as appellate proceedings had failed to esta…

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)

…taken any steps to rectify its declaration before authorities before whom such declaration was made, there was no valid reason that the statement of the director cannot be relied upon as held by CIT(A) Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. vs DCIT (ITAT, Bang.) 108 ITD 142.” 8. On appreciating material and contention we find that while hearing this appeal the bench on numerous occasion dealt with contention of ld.AR about non availability of any panchnama about seizure of diary and we see that on 06.10.2022 Bench directed Ld. DR to file panchanama and documents for complete appreciation of the controversy. Again on…

SARITHA SHIVAYYAGARI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(3) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Smt. Saritha Shivayyagari Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad. Ward 11(3) Pan:Bkqps0479M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.10.2019 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2009-10. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs.63,75,185/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. Ita 98/Hyd/2020

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…ed, onus lies with the assessee to prove that the declaration is made out of misconception as held by ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344. The decision held in the case of Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT ( ITAT, Bang) 108 ITD 142 squarely applicable in the case. It is held that:- "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 s…

SARITA DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BANGALORE

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 723/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Years : 2010 – 11

For Appellant: Shri.KR.Pradeep CA along with Smt.Girija G.P.CAFor Respondent: Shri.Priyadarshi Mishra

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 234A

…10-11 • Senate vs DCIT reported in (2016) 68 Taxmann.com 223 (Bang) • Rameshchandra and Co vs CIT reported in (1987) 35 taxman 153 (BOM) • Kunhambu vs CIT reported in (1996) 86 Taxmann 477 (Ker) • Carpenters classic (exempt) (P) Ltd vs DCIT reported in (2007) 108 ITD 142 (Bang) • Sudharshan P.Amin vs ACIT reported in (2013) 35 Taxmann.com 370 (Guj) 5.5. He thus submitted that proceedings initiated under section 148 does not get vitiated due to peculiar circumstances in present facts. 5.6. On merits, Ld.Sr.DR submitted that, having said so in the statement recorded under section 131 and subsequent statement recor…