CIT & Anr. v. S.K. Srigiri And Bros.

298 ITR 13High Court2008#3751 most cited

What is CIT & Anr. v. S.K. Srigiri And Bros. authority for?

Income declared during a survey under section 133A is to be treated as business income, and section 115BBE will not apply to such income.

32

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v S.K. Srigiri And Bros · section 133A · survey proceedings · business income · income from other sources · section 115BBE · unexplained investment · section 69A · KAR HC

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 133ASection 143(1)Section 28Section 40b(v)Section 69Section 69B

Issues it is cited on

survey under section 133asection 69bsection 271aacadvance taxsection 115bbreasoned ordersection 115bsection 133asection 133section 115bbeunexplained investmentsection 28

Judgments citing CIT & Anr. v. S.K. Srigiri And Bros.

Khan Mohammad Diamonds & Jewellers Private Limited, Guntur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/VIZ/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.141/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S Khan Mohammad Diamonds Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax & Jewellers Private Limited, (Central) 5-37-221/A, 4Th Lane Visakhapatnam Brodipet, Guntur [Pan : Aacck6467A]

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal. CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 11BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 263Section 68Section 69Section 69C

…Vs. Dy.CIT, ITA No.3281/Ahd/2009; b) CIT Vs. M/s Sanjay Bairathi Gems ltd. ITA No.157/JP/17 C) Dy.CIT Vs. Ram Narayan Birla 2017 TaxPub (DT) 4439 (Jp-Trib) d) M/s Kim Pharma (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT, ITA No.106 of 2011 (P&H); CIT another v.S.K.Srigiri and Bros [2008] 298 ITR 13 [Karn]” 6 I.T.A. No141/Viz/2020, A.Y.2017-18 M/s Khan Mohammad Diamonds & Jewellers Pvt. Ltd, Guntur 5.1. The AO completed the assessment after considering the explanation offered by the assessee. In the explanation, the assessee has explained as to why the same should be treated as business income and the provisions of section 69 and section 115…

Deccan Jewellers Private Limited, Vijayawada vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/VIZ/2020[10000]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.140/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-2018) M/S Deccan Jewellers Private Limited Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of K.B.N.Complex Income Tax (Central) D.No.27-16-65 Visakhapatnam Governorpet Vijayawada [Pan : Aaccd1524H] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shrim.V.Prasad.Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Dr 22.09.2020 सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.11.2020

For Appellant: ShriM.V.Prasad.ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263Section 69

….CIT 36 Taxmann.com 348 (HC AP) iv) CIT Vs. Srinivasa Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd., 60 Taxmann.com 207 (HC AP) v) CIT Vs. P.D.Abraham 48 taxmann.com 352 (Kerala HC) vi) Bajargan Traders Vs. ACIT ITA No.137/JP/17, dated 17.03.2017 vii) CIT Vs. S.K.Srigiri and Brothers 298 ITR 13 viii) DCIT Vs. V.Ram Narayan Birla ITA No.482/JP/2015 dated 30.09.2016 ix) Chaksi Hiralal Magan Lal Vs. DCIT 45 SOT 349 x) Daulatram Rawatmull Vs. CIT 64 ITR 593 xi) M/s A Star Exports ITA No.4411 Mumbai ITAT 4 I.T.A. No.140/Viz/2020, A.Y.2017-18 M/s Deccan Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vijayawada xii) M/s Silver Palace, Pune Vs. DCIT ITA No.893/Pun/2016…

Deccan Tobacco Company, Guntur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Viskhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/VIZ/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.139/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S Deccan Tobacco Company Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax D.No.5-7-6-1/5, Brodipet (Central) Guntur Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aahfd1174H]

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal. CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 263Section 69

….CIT 36 Taxmann.com 348 (HC AP) iv) CIT Vs. Srinivasa Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd., 60 Taxmann.com 207 (HC AP) v) CIT Vs. P.D.Abraham 48 taxmann.com 352 (Kerala HC) vi) Bajargan Traders Vs. ACIT ITA No.137/JP/17, dated 17.03.2017 vii) CIT Vs. S.K.Srigiri and Brothers 298 ITR 13 viii) DCIT Vs. V.Ram Narayan Birla ITA No.482/JP/2015 dated 30.09.2016 ix) ChaksiHiralalMagan Lal Vs. DCIT 45 SOT 349 x) DaulatramRawatmull Vs. CIT 64 ITR 593 xi) M/s A Star Exports ITA No.4411 Mumbai ITAT xii) M/s Silver Palace, Pune Vs. DCIT ITA No.893/Pun/2016 2.1. The Ld.Pr.CIT considered the explanation offered by the assessee and viewed that…

Dte Exports Private Limited, Guntur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 138/VIZ/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Nov 2020AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.138/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) M/S Dte Exports Private Limited Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax D.No.5-7-6, 1/5, Brodipet (Central) Guntur Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaacd7845B]

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal. CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 69

…d " Income from Business". The Bench has held that the excess stock was part of the stock, and therefore, the same was correctly held by the CIT (A) as income from business. Similar view is also held in the following cases: 1. CIT vs S K Srigiri and Brothers (298 ITR 13), Kar. 12 I.T.A. No138/Viz/2020, A.Y.2017-18 M/s DTE Exports Private Ltd., Guntur 2. DCIT vs V Ram Narayan Birla (482/JP/2015) dated 30 09 2016 In the case of S P Equipment and Services vs ACIT (33 DTR 265), the provision of Section 40(b) was also made applicable on the profits earned by the firm. In the case of M/s Choksi Hiralal Maganlal vs DC…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ratnagiri Circle, Ratnagiri vs. Sagar Sawali Beach Resorts, Ratnagiri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1246/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69

…of Hon'ble Chattisghad High Court in the case of Dhanush General Stores (Supra) and held that in the absence of decision on the issue by the jurisdictional High Court the decision of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. S. K. Shrigiri and Bros. (2008) 298 ITR 13 (Kar) which was in favour of the assessee is to he applied following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vegetable Products, reported in 88 ITR 192 (SC), the appellant was entitled to get the deduction of remuneration paid to partners since the additional income declared was to be treated as business income. The appellant also…

Sh. Sanjay Bairathi, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, grounds taken by Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1343/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Jun 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT)
Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 251

…in books of accounts and no source from where it was derived was declared by the assessee and therefore it was held that the same cannot be assessed as business income. In this case the decision of Karnataka high Court in case of CIT V. S.K. Srigiri and Bros 298 ITR 13 relied by the Assessee was distinguished by holding that in this case assessee received additional income from business only. But in the present case also the excess stock offered in survey is part of the business income. The excess stock is determined by valuing the business stock at current price instead of the purchase price. Nothing was brough…

Construction Protal Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1608/PUN/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1607 & 1608/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 133ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ “ए” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी डी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य सद"य "ी "ी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव , लेखा सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी िवकास िवकास अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सम" एवं "ी "ी अव"थी अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सम" सम" एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 1607 & 1608/PUN/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Construction Portal Pvt. Ltd., M/s. MZSK & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Riversi…

Construction Protal Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1607/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1607 & 1608/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 133ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ “ए” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी डी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य सद"य "ी "ी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव , लेखा सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी िवकास िवकास अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सम" एवं "ी "ी अव"थी अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सम" सम" एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos. 1607 & 1608/PUN/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 Construction Portal Pvt. Ltd., M/s. MZSK & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Riversi…

Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) -1

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1609/PUN/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 597/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 133ASection 154Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ “ए” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी डी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य सद"य "ी "ी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव , लेखा सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी िवकास िवकास अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सम" एवं "ी "ी अव"थी अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सम" सम" एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 597/PUN/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., M/s. MZSK & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wel…

Dy. CIT, Circle 1(2), Pune vs. Gera Development Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 767/PUN/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 597/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 133ASection 154Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ “ए” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी डी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य सद"य "ी "ी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव , लेखा सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी िवकास िवकास अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सम" एवं "ी "ी अव"थी अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सम" सम" एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 597/PUN/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., M/s. MZSK & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wel…

Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Asst. CIT, Circle 1(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 597/PUN/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jun 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 597/Pun/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Khandelwal & Shri Rajiv ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 133ASection 154Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे "ायपीठ “ए” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE "ी डी "ी डी. क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य सद"य "ी "ी क"णाकरा क"णाकरा राव , लेखा सद"य सद"य डी डी राव राव लेखा लेखा एवं "ी "ी िवकास िवकास अव"थी अव"थी, "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य केकेकेके सम" सम" एवं "ी "ी अव"थी अव"थी "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सम" सम" एवं एवं िवकास िवकास BEFORE SHRI D.KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 597/PUN/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd., M/s. MZSK & Associates, Chartered Accountants, Level 3, Business Bay, Plot No.84, Wel…

Bindal Smelting (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5568/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri At Varkeyay: 2010-11 Bindal Smelting P.Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle 3(1) 987, 1St Floor, Hardhiyan Singh Road New Delhi Karolbagh New Delhi 110 005

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Chopra, Sr. D.R
Section 115Section 80Section 80I

…shion World vs. ITA 5568/Del/2013 A.Y. 2010-11 Bindal Smelting P.Ltd., New Delhi ACIT in ITA 1634/Ahmd./2006 for the A.Y. 2003-04 and other case law for this proposition. 7.2. He further relied on the following case laws. * CIT vs. SK Srigiri & Bros. (2008) 298 ITR 13 (Karna) * CIT vs. Margaret’s Hope Tea Co. Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 747 (Cal.) 8. The Ld.Sr.D.R. on the other hand disputed the contentions of the assessee and submitted that the assessee has admitted before the excise authorities that there was a shortage in stock and has accordingly paid the duty. He argued that such confessional statement cannot be…