CIT v. Ashok Kumar Jain

372 ITR 507High Court2015#3478 most cited

What is CIT v. Ashok Kumar Jain authority for?

An addition to income cannot be made solely on the basis of a statement made during a survey or search, unless corroborated by other evidence. This principle applies even if the statement was made under oath.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ashok Kumar Jain · 372 ITR 507 · addition on statement · survey · search · retracted statement · corroborative evidence · natural justice

Sections most often in play

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 147Section 37(1)Section 133(6)Section 132Section 69C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

gaarsection 65(b)section 181section 194qsection 193section 65b(4)retraction of statementsection 158bb(1)section 153(c)jewellery found during searchretracted statementsection 158bb

Judgments citing CIT v. Ashok Kumar Jain

Kiritkumar Dharsibai Suba, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-1(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, these appeals are also allowed

ITA 1190/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Nishita MandalywalaFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153C

…Bombay HC) v. Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra & Others 4SCC 465 (Hon’ble SC) vi. CIT vs. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480 (Hon’ble SC) vii. CIT vs. Ashok Kumar Jain (2014) 369 ITR 145 (Hon’ble HC) viii. CIT vs. M.P Scrap Dealers (2015) 372 ITR 507 (Hon’ble Gujarat HC) ix. Jain Trading Co vs. ITO (2007) 17 SOT 574 (Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai) 6. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the grounds challenging the action of AO in entering jurisdiction u/s 153(C) of the Act. According to CIT(A), the AO had recorded satisfaction and that in any case the assessee had participated in the assessment proc…

Kiritkumar Dharsibai Suba, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-1(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, these appeals are also allowed

ITA 1189/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Nishita MandalywalaFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153C

…Bombay HC) v. Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra & Others 4SCC 465 (Hon’ble SC) vi. CIT vs. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480 (Hon’ble SC) vii. CIT vs. Ashok Kumar Jain (2014) 369 ITR 145 (Hon’ble HC) viii. CIT vs. M.P Scrap Dealers (2015) 372 ITR 507 (Hon’ble Gujarat HC) ix. Jain Trading Co vs. ITO (2007) 17 SOT 574 (Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai) 6. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the grounds challenging the action of AO in entering jurisdiction u/s 153(C) of the Act. According to CIT(A), the AO had recorded satisfaction and that in any case the assessee had participated in the assessment proc…

Kiritkumar Dharsibai Suba, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-1(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, these appeals are also allowed

ITA 1188/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Nishita MandalywalaFor Respondent: Smt. Neelam Shukla
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153C

…Bombay HC) v. Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra & Others 4SCC 465 (Hon’ble SC) vi. CIT vs. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480 (Hon’ble SC) vii. CIT vs. Ashok Kumar Jain (2014) 369 ITR 145 (Hon’ble HC) viii. CIT vs. M.P Scrap Dealers (2015) 372 ITR 507 (Hon’ble Gujarat HC) ix. Jain Trading Co vs. ITO (2007) 17 SOT 574 (Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai) 6. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the grounds challenging the action of AO in entering jurisdiction u/s 153(C) of the Act. According to CIT(A), the AO had recorded satisfaction and that in any case the assessee had participated in the assessment proc…

M/S. Fdc Limited, Mumbai vs. Addll. CIT- 8 (1), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 6901/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6901/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.6840/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S Fdc Limited Acit Circle– 8(1) बिाम/ 142-48, S. V. Road {Now Acit Circle 9(3)(1)} Jogeshwari (West) R. No. 215, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Mumbai – 400 102 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacf-0253-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : & 3. आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7016/Mum/2018 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Circle– 8(1) M/S Fdc Limited बिाम/ {Now Acit Circle 9(3)(1)} 142-48, S. V. Road R. No. 215, Aayakar Bhavan Jogeshwari (West) Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 102 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacf-0253-H (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri S. S. Nagar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Sunil Deshpande, Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 20/07/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 08/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Nagar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 92C

…This proposition has been laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT V/s S. Khader Khan & Sons (2013; 352 ITR 480) as well as in various other decisions of Hon’ble High Courts {CIT V/s Ashok Kumar Jain (2014) 369 ITR 145 (Raj); CIT V/s MP Scrap Traders (2015) 372 ITR 507 (Guj)}. 24 M/s FDC Limited Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Another fact borne out of the record is that all these officials have submitted sworn affidavits clarifying their earlier statements and confirming that R & D activity took place outside Jogeshwari unit also. These evidences have nowhere been controverted and no further investigation…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Legend Developers & Constructions, Kurnool

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 752/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik
Section 143(3)

…0 :- 16 -: ITA Nos. 743, 752, 747, 748, 749 & 750/Hyd/2018 IX. Asst. CIT Vs. Krishna Developers 2017 Tax Pub 1247 [Ahd-Trib] X. Gajjam Chinna Yellappa Vs. ITO, High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh [2015] 59 Taxmann.com 69 XI. CIT Vs. Mp. Scrap Traders 372 ITR 507 XII. ACIT Vs. Ravi Agricultural Industries [ITAT] Agra ITA No. 145/AGR2006 XIII. Asst. CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2017 155 TR [A] XIV. DCIT Vs. Vijaya Mehta & Vice-Versa 2017 156 ITR TR (A) XVII. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli Vs. Pampathi [2009] 310 ITR 64; Karnataka; Dated 31.01.2008; 6. The appellant has also referred Supreme Cou…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Agnur Jayaramudu (HUF), Kurnool

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 750/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik
Section 143(3)

…0 :- 16 -: ITA Nos. 743, 752, 747, 748, 749 & 750/Hyd/2018 IX. Asst. CIT Vs. Krishna Developers 2017 Tax Pub 1247 [Ahd-Trib] X. Gajjam Chinna Yellappa Vs. ITO, High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh [2015] 59 Taxmann.com 69 XI. CIT Vs. Mp. Scrap Traders 372 ITR 507 XII. ACIT Vs. Ravi Agricultural Industries [ITAT] Agra ITA No. 145/AGR2006 XIII. Asst. CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2017 155 TR [A] XIV. DCIT Vs. Vijaya Mehta & Vice-Versa 2017 156 ITR TR (A) XVII. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli Vs. Pampathi [2009] 310 ITR 64; Karnataka; Dated 31.01.2008; 6. The appellant has also referred Supreme Cou…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Agnur Jayaramudu (Ind), Kurnool

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 749/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik
Section 143(3)

…0 :- 16 -: ITA Nos. 743, 752, 747, 748, 749 & 750/Hyd/2018 IX. Asst. CIT Vs. Krishna Developers 2017 Tax Pub 1247 [Ahd-Trib] X. Gajjam Chinna Yellappa Vs. ITO, High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh [2015] 59 Taxmann.com 69 XI. CIT Vs. Mp. Scrap Traders 372 ITR 507 XII. ACIT Vs. Ravi Agricultural Industries [ITAT] Agra ITA No. 145/AGR2006 XIII. Asst. CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2017 155 TR [A] XIV. DCIT Vs. Vijaya Mehta & Vice-Versa 2017 156 ITR TR (A) XVII. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli Vs. Pampathi [2009] 310 ITR 64; Karnataka; Dated 31.01.2008; 6. The appellant has also referred Supreme Cou…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Agnur Nirmala, Kurnool

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 748/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik
Section 143(3)

…0 :- 16 -: ITA Nos. 743, 752, 747, 748, 749 & 750/Hyd/2018 IX. Asst. CIT Vs. Krishna Developers 2017 Tax Pub 1247 [Ahd-Trib] X. Gajjam Chinna Yellappa Vs. ITO, High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh [2015] 59 Taxmann.com 69 XI. CIT Vs. Mp. Scrap Traders 372 ITR 507 XII. ACIT Vs. Ravi Agricultural Industries [ITAT] Agra ITA No. 145/AGR2006 XIII. Asst. CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2017 155 TR [A] XIV. DCIT Vs. Vijaya Mehta & Vice-Versa 2017 156 ITR TR (A) XVII. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli Vs. Pampathi [2009] 310 ITR 64; Karnataka; Dated 31.01.2008; 6. The appellant has also referred Supreme Cou…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Agnur Janakiram, Kurnool

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 747/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik
Section 143(3)

…0 :- 16 -: ITA Nos. 743, 752, 747, 748, 749 & 750/Hyd/2018 IX. Asst. CIT Vs. Krishna Developers 2017 Tax Pub 1247 [Ahd-Trib] X. Gajjam Chinna Yellappa Vs. ITO, High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh [2015] 59 Taxmann.com 69 XI. CIT Vs. Mp. Scrap Traders 372 ITR 507 XII. ACIT Vs. Ravi Agricultural Industries [ITAT] Agra ITA No. 145/AGR2006 XIII. Asst. CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2017 155 TR [A] XIV. DCIT Vs. Vijaya Mehta & Vice-Versa 2017 156 ITR TR (A) XVII. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli Vs. Pampathi [2009] 310 ITR 64; Karnataka; Dated 31.01.2008; 6. The appellant has also referred Supreme Cou…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1, Kurnool vs. Legend Developers & Constructions, Kurnool

Appeals are dismissed in above terms

ITA 743/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik
Section 143(3)

…0 :- 16 -: ITA Nos. 743, 752, 747, 748, 749 & 750/Hyd/2018 IX. Asst. CIT Vs. Krishna Developers 2017 Tax Pub 1247 [Ahd-Trib] X. Gajjam Chinna Yellappa Vs. ITO, High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh [2015] 59 Taxmann.com 69 XI. CIT Vs. Mp. Scrap Traders 372 ITR 507 XII. ACIT Vs. Ravi Agricultural Industries [ITAT] Agra ITA No. 145/AGR2006 XIII. Asst. CIT Vs. Layer Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2017 155 TR [A] XIV. DCIT Vs. Vijaya Mehta & Vice-Versa 2017 156 ITR TR (A) XVII. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli Vs. Pampathi [2009] 310 ITR 64; Karnataka; Dated 31.01.2008; 6. The appellant has also referred Supreme Cou…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4966/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…he view that mere statement without there being any corroborative evidence, should not be treated as conclusive evidence against the maker of the statement. ” Same viewhas been taken in the following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) a) CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 231 Taxman 392 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Tara Chand Mahipal [2016] 65 taxmann.com 29 (Calcutta) c) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal [2015] 379 ITR 367 (Delhi) d) It is also submitted that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the 5.9 Act does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search. Afore…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4965/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…he view that mere statement without there being any corroborative evidence, should not be treated as conclusive evidence against the maker of the statement. ” Same viewhas been taken in the following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) a) CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 231 Taxman 392 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Tara Chand Mahipal [2016] 65 taxmann.com 29 (Calcutta) c) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal [2015] 379 ITR 367 (Delhi) d) It is also submitted that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the 5.9 Act does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search. Afore…

B.R. Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4964/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 10Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)Section 234ASection 68

…he view that mere statement without there being any corroborative evidence, should not be treated as conclusive evidence against the maker of the statement. ” Same viewhas been taken in the following judicial pronouncements: CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) a) CIT vs. Vivek Aggarwal [2015] 231 Taxman 392 (Delhi) b) CIT vs. Tara Chand Mahipal [2016] 65 taxmann.com 29 (Calcutta) c) CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal [2015] 379 ITR 367 (Delhi) d) It is also submitted that statement recorded under section 132(4) of the 5.9 Act does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search. Afore…

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. Sai Anand Constrction, Thane

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1834/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Sai Anand Construction, Tax, Shop No.22-27, Sai Tirth, Circle-3, Room No.02, Vs. Siddarth Nagar, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Kopri Colony, B-Wing, Wagle Indl. Estate, Thane (E)- 400 603 Thane (W)-400 604 Pan: Aakfm 2891B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Saurabhkumar Rai, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Shashi Tulsiyan, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2018

For Appellant: Shri Saurabhkumar Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shashi Tulsiyan, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 68

…00 – Rs.2088) = Rs.51,40,800/- 202 Total Amount Rs.68,23,300/- 12. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by observing and holding as under: “26. In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot -III Vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 372 ITR 507 (Gujarat) the Assessing Officer made addition in hands of assessee-firm as well as its partner, as unexplained investments solely relying upon statement of partner recorded at time of survey which was subsequently retracted. Except said statement, there was no other material or corroborative material with Assessing Officer to justify said additio…