CIT v. Khader Khan Sons.

369 ITR 145High Court2014#4852 most cited

What is CIT v. Khader Khan Sons. authority for?

A statement made during a survey under section 133A or a search under section 132(4) has evidentiary value only if corroborated by other evidence. The Assessing Officer must prove their case with supporting evidence when a statement is retracted.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Khader Khan Sons · section 133A · section 132(4) · survey · search · retracted statement · corroborative evidence · evidentiary value · onus of proof

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 131Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 145(3)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 153(c)retraction of statementretracted statementsurrender of incomesection 158bbstatement under section 132(4)survey under section 133asatisfaction notesection 133asection 131regular assessmentblock period

Judgments citing CIT v. Khader Khan Sons.

Shri Ashok Dharendra, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 256/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 256/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Ashok Dharendra, Cuke D.C.I.T. 23, Shivraj Niketan Scheme, Vs. Central Circle-3, Gautam Marg, Nr Vaishali Jaipur. Nagar Circle, Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aavpd 6554 B Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Manish Agarwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri S. Najmi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 12 /04/2022 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 4, Jaipur Dated 01/12/2017 For The A.Y. 2015-16 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 153B(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- Made In The Assessment Completed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Solely On The Basis Of Statements Recorded During The Course Of Search Which Stood Retracted By The Assessee Through An Affidavit Filed. Thus, The Addition Made Solely On The Basis Of Such Retracted Statements Deserves To Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri S. Najmi (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153B(1)(b)Section 3

…hen the assessee made retraction from the alleged surrender to find out as to 7 ITA 256/JP/2018_ Sh. Ashok Dharendra Vs DCIT whom the advance was given or form whom the goods is to be received. It is further submitted that in the case of Shri Ashok Kumar Jain 369 ITR 145 the Jurisdictional High Court of Rajasthan has held that if the assessee does not adhere to the surrender made then it is for the Learned Assessing Officer to bring on record cogent material and other evidences to support the addition rather than simply rely on the statement. In this case the position is exactly the same. As submitted above, the…

M/S Atop Fasteners (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

ITA 1616/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Mar 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Dahiya, CIT
Section 133ASection 250(6)

…. 286/98/2013-IT dated 18.12.2014 (page 71&72 of Paper Book) dismissed the departme ntal appeal. The said decision, it was submitted, fully supports the present case. 37.3 Referring to the decision referred to at Sr.No. 3 CIT Vs Ashok Kumar Jain ( Raj.HC) 369 ITR 145 ( available at ITA-1616/CHD/2019 A.Y. 2011-12 Page 33 of 84 page No. 81-84 of Paper Book ) on a reading from the Head Note itself, it was submitted : “Addition—Addition on basis of surrendered amount—Deletion of addition— Survey u/s. 133A was carried out at business premises of Assessee—During course of survey some incriminating documents were…

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

…he AO to prove his case by corroborative evidences. 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 now…

Paliwal Jewellers, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

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

ITA 82/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Nov 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kr. Gupta (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Shailendra Sharma (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

…T V/s M/s Maverick Share Brokers P. Ltd 57 TW 87(Raj.) CIT Vs. Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.)(HC). CIT Vs. Satyanorayan Agarwal (2002) 255 ITR (AT) 69 (Kol.) (Trib.) Abdul Qaymme Vs. CIT (1990) 184 ITR 404 (All.) (HC) CITVs. Ashok Kumar Jain (2014) 369 ITR 145 (Raj.) (HC). M/s. Paliwal Jewellers. The ld. Counsel submitted that the Central Board of Direct Taxes has issued fresh instruction vide F.No. 286/98/2013-IT (INV.II) dated 18.12.2014, the text of which is reproduced below: - 1. “Instances / complaints of undue influence/ coercion have come to notice of the CBDT that some assessee were coerced…