CIT v. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd.

223 CTR 179High Court2009#7331 most cited

What is CIT v. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. authority for?

Income cannot be assessed based solely on a retracted statement if there is no other material to substantiate the addition. Additions to income must be supported by evidence and cannot be made on assumptions or presumptions.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. · retracted statement · addition without material · presumption basis · evidence for addition · preponderance of probability · section 10(38) · bogus ltcg · tangible material

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10(38)Section 114 of the Evidence ActSection 115BBESection 132Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144A

Issues it is cited on

bogus ltcgretracted statementpreponderance of probabilitypaper companybogus long term capital gaincolourable devicepenny stocksection 10(38)live linklong term capital gainstangible materialentry operator

Judgments citing CIT v. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd.

ITO 41(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Deepika Anil Agarwal, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue stands

ITA 1885/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68

…e retracted statement If not material to prove 1. Meghraj Jain V. UOI (Bombay High Court) 2. KailashbenManharlalChokshi v. CIT [2008] 174 Taxman 466 (Guj.) 3. M. Narayanan & Bros. v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 201 Taxman 207 (Mag.) 4. Bansal High Carbons (P)Ltd. 2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del). 5. Sanjeev Kumar Jain (2009) 310 ITR 178 (P&H) 6. CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra and others (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.) 7. Abid Malik Vs UOI, (2009TIOL272HC Del-FEMA) 8. CIT vs. Uttamchand Jain 320 ITR 554 (Bom), 9. Srinivas Naik (2009)117 ITD 201 (Bang) Addition cannot be made on assumption basis. There must be some material on record as evidence f…

Rajendra Kumar Mundra (HUF), Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1000/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Girish Agrawalrajendra Kumar Mundra Vs. Ito, Ward 24(3)(1) (Huf) Piramal Chamber C-28, Ameya Bldg, Behind Lalbaug, Mumbai – Ymca Dn Nagar Andheri (W) 400012. 400053. Pan/Gir No.Aadh6828J (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 263Section 68Section 69A

…e retracted statement If not material to prove 1. Meghraj Jain V. UOI (Bombay High Court) 2. KailashbenManharlalChokshi v. CIT [2008] 174 Taxman 466 (Guj.) 3. M. Narayanan & Bros. v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 201 Taxman 207 (Mag.) 4. Bansal High Carbons (P)Ltd. 2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del). 5. Sanjeev Kumar Jain (2009) 310 ITR 178 (P&H) 6. CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra and others (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.) 7. Abid Malik Vs UOI, (2009TIOL272HC Del-FEMA) 8. CIT vs. Uttamchand Jain 320 ITR 554 (Bom), 9. Srinivas Naik (2009)117 ITD 201 (Bang) Addition cannot be made on assumption basis. There must be some material on record as evidence…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur vs. M/S. N. R. Tmt(India) Pvt. Ltd., Raigarh

In the result, while for the appeal/preliminary objection filed by the assessee company in ITA No

ITA 9/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.03/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Nr Tmt (India) Pvt. Ltd. Flat No.106, Goverdhan Tower, Chaitanya Nagar, Raigarh Pan: Aaecp8302R

For Appellant: S/shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: S/shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 153D

…MT (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (Central)-2, Raipur ITA Nos. 03 & 09/RPR/2021 said count itself. The Ld. AR in support of his aforesaid contention had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd, 223 CTR 179 (Del) and that of the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in the case of CIT Vs. Utkal Alloys Limited 319 ITR 339 (Orissa). Apropos the statement of an employee of the assessee company that was recorded in the course of the search proceedings when the aforesaid valuation was being carried out, the Ld. AR stated that the said person had merely confirmed…

M/S Nrtmt(India) Pvt. Ltd, Raigarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2, Raipur

In the result, while for the appeal/preliminary objection filed by the assessee company in ITA No

ITA 3/RPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.03/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/S. Nr Tmt (India) Pvt. Ltd. Flat No.106, Goverdhan Tower, Chaitanya Nagar, Raigarh Pan: Aaecp8302R

For Appellant: S/shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: S/shri S.L Anuragi, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 153D

…MT (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (Central)-2, Raipur ITA Nos. 03 & 09/RPR/2021 said count itself. The Ld. AR in support of his aforesaid contention had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd, 223 CTR 179 (Del) and that of the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in the case of CIT Vs. Utkal Alloys Limited 319 ITR 339 (Orissa). Apropos the statement of an employee of the assessee company that was recorded in the course of the search proceedings when the aforesaid valuation was being carried out, the Ld. AR stated that the said person had merely confirmed…

Sanjay Singal, Chandigarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-1, Chandigarh

ITA 655/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 655/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Sanjay Singal, The DCIT, बनाम Plot No.78, Industrial Area, Central Circle-1, VS Phase-1, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: ANRPS7985C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 610/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s Sanjay Singal, HUF The DCIT, बनाम Plot No.78, Industrial Area, Central C…

M/S Sanjay Singal HUF, Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

ITA 610/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69ASection 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 655/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Sanjay Singal, The DCIT, बनाम Plot No.78, Industrial Area, Central Circle-1, VS Phase-1, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: ANRPS7985C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 610/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/s Sanjay Singal, HUF The DCIT, बनाम Plot No.78, Industrial Area, Central C…

Udayan Grover, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2880/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

Section 10(38)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 57Section 68

…e retracted statement If not material to prove 1. Meghraj Jain V. UOI (Bombay High Court) 2. KailashbenManharlalChokshi v. CIT [2008] 174 Taxman 466 (Guj.) 3. M. Narayanan & Bros. v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 201 Taxman 207 (Mag.) 4. Bansal High Carbons (P)Ltd. 2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del). 5. Sanjeev Kumar Jain (2009) 310 ITR 178 (P&H) 6. CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra and others (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.) 7. Abid Malik Vs UOI, (2009TIOL272HC Del-FEMA) 8. CIT vs. Uttamchand Jain 320 ITR 554 (Bom), 9. Srinivas Naik (2009)117 ITD 201 (Bang) Page No. 34 Udayan Grover Addition cannot be made on assumption basis. There must be some mater…

Aakash Films Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT -50, Mumbai

In the result, Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1762/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Aakash Films Private Limited V. Income Tax Officer – 16(1)(1) Room No. 436A, Plot No. A-51, Midc Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Marol Industrial Area Next To Aipma Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aahca5657K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Aakash Ashish Realtors Limited V. Cit – 50, Central Circle – 8(3) Cts No. 766, 534 Mumbai S.V. Road, New Oshiwara Station Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai – 400102 Pan: Aaack7241C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…Limited & M/s. Aakash Ashish Realtors Limited 1.Meghraj Jain V. UOI (Bombay High Court) 2. KailashbenManharlal Chokshi v. CIT [2008] 174 Taxman 433 (GUJ.) 3. M. Narayanan & Bros. v. Asstt. CIT [2011] 201 Taxman 207 (Mag.) 4. Bansal High Carbons (P)Ltd. 2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del). 5. Sanjeev Kumar Jain (2009) 310 ITR 178 (P&H) 6. CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra and others (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.) 7. Abid Malik Vs UOI, (2009TIOL272HC Del-FEMA) 8. CIT vs. Uttamchand Jain 320 ITR 554 (Bom), 9. Srinivas Naik (2009)117 ITD 201 (Bang) -> Addition cannot be made on assumption basis. There must be some material on record as evidenc…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Mahesh Mehta, Delhi

ITA 3347/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…transferred in someone others name and the assessee has been cheated and relied upon the cases of Shri Santosh Kumar Garg in ITA No.2864/Del/2013 order dated 29.09.2017, CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Del.), Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. (2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del.), M. Narayanan & Bros. vs. ACIT (2011) 13 taxmann.com 49 (Mad.), Chetnaben J Shah vs. ITO in ITA No.1437 of 2007 order dated 14.07.2016, CIT vs. Ramanbhai B. Patel in ITA No.207 & 208 of 2008 order dated 20.07.2016 and CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra & Ors. (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.). 3347 /Del./2014 13. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Kusum Mehta, New Delhi

ITA 2773/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…transferred in someone others name and the assessee has been cheated and relied upon the cases of Shri Santosh Kumar Garg in ITA No.2864/Del/2013 order dated 29.09.2017, CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Del.), Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. (2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del.), M. Narayanan & Bros. vs. ACIT (2011) 13 taxmann.com 49 (Mad.), Chetnaben J Shah vs. ITO in ITA No.1437 of 2007 order dated 14.07.2016, CIT vs. Ramanbhai B. Patel in ITA No.207 & 208 of 2008 order dated 20.07.2016 and CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra & Ors. (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.). 3347 /Del./2014 13. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the…

Kusum Mehta, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2504/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…transferred in someone others name and the assessee has been cheated and relied upon the cases of Shri Santosh Kumar Garg in ITA No.2864/Del/2013 order dated 29.09.2017, CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Del.), Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. (2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del.), M. Narayanan & Bros. vs. ACIT (2011) 13 taxmann.com 49 (Mad.), Chetnaben J Shah vs. ITO in ITA No.1437 of 2007 order dated 14.07.2016, CIT vs. Ramanbhai B. Patel in ITA No.207 & 208 of 2008 order dated 20.07.2016 and CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra & Ors. (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.). 3347 /Del./2014 13. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the…

Mahesh Mehta, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2503/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…transferred in someone others name and the assessee has been cheated and relied upon the cases of Shri Santosh Kumar Garg in ITA No.2864/Del/2013 order dated 29.09.2017, CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (Del.), Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. (2009) 223 CTR 179 (Del.), M. Narayanan & Bros. vs. ACIT (2011) 13 taxmann.com 49 (Mad.), Chetnaben J Shah vs. ITO in ITA No.1437 of 2007 order dated 14.07.2016, CIT vs. Ramanbhai B. Patel in ITA No.207 & 208 of 2008 order dated 20.07.2016 and CIT vs. K. Bhuvanendra & Ors. (2008) 303 ITR 235 (Mad.). 3347 /Del./2014 13. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mahesh Wood Products (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 4875/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4873 TO 4875/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2008-09 to 2010-11 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, Vs. M/S MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS ROOM NO. 355, 3RD FLOOR, (P) LTD., JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, A-121, ASHOK VIHAR, NEW DELHI – 110 055 PHASE-1, NEW DELHI (PAN AAACM0118Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR) Assessee by Sh. S.K. Gupta, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIHU, JM These 03 appeals are filed by the Revenue against the respective Orders passed by…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mahesh Wood Products (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 4874/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4873 TO 4875/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2008-09 to 2010-11 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, Vs. M/S MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS ROOM NO. 355, 3RD FLOOR, (P) LTD., JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, A-121, ASHOK VIHAR, NEW DELHI – 110 055 PHASE-1, NEW DELHI (PAN AAACM0118Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR) Assessee by Sh. S.K. Gupta, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIHU, JM These 03 appeals are filed by the Revenue against the respective Orders passed by…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mahesh Wood Products (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 4873/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4873 TO 4875/Del/2014 Assessment Years: 2008-09 to 2010-11 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-03, Vs. M/S MAHESH WOOD PRODUCTS ROOM NO. 355, 3RD FLOOR, (P) LTD., JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, A-121, ASHOK VIHAR, NEW DELHI – 110 055 PHASE-1, NEW DELHI (PAN AAACM0118Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT(DR) Assessee by Sh. S.K. Gupta, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIHU, JM These 03 appeals are filed by the Revenue against the respective Orders passed by…

CIT v. Bansal High Carbons (P) Ltd. (223 CTR 179) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax