CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

300 ITR 157High Court2008#155 most cited

What is CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son authority for?

A statement recorded under duress during a survey, if subsequently retracted, has no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for an income-tax assessment; the assessment should instead rely on audited accounts.

452

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son · S. Khader Khan Son · Section 133A · Section 132(4) · retracted statement · survey statement evidentiary value · statement under duress · assessment based on retracted statement · no evidentiary value for survey statement · audited accounts reliance

Also reported as

214 CTR 58940 Taxmann.com 329

Sections most often in play

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 115BBESection 132(4)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 133a(3)(iii)retracted statementstatement under section 132(4)survey under section 133asection 269sssection 133asection 292csection 132(4a)loose paperssection 158bsection 133section 132(4)

Judgments citing CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

Ganraj Homes LLP, Pune vs. Income Tax, Central Circle 2(3), Pune

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 878/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153A

…nd the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer is on the basis of surmises and guesswork. 17. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value: i) CIT vs. Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad) ii) Paul Mathews & Sons vs. CIT (2003) 129 Taxman 416 (Ker) iii) CIT vs. P. Balasubramaniam (2013) 33 taxmann.com 130 (Mad) 18. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that no arbitrary addition to the income can be made based on dumb documents, loose papers containing scribbling, rough / vague notings: i) PCIT vs. Umesh Israni…

Ganraj Homes LLP, Pune vs. Income Tax, Central Circle 2(3), Pune

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 874/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Feb 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 153A

…nd the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer is on the basis of surmises and guesswork. 17. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value: i) CIT vs. Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad) ii) Paul Mathews & Sons vs. CIT (2003) 129 Taxman 416 (Ker) iii) CIT vs. P. Balasubramaniam (2013) 33 taxmann.com 130 (Mad) 18. Referring to the following decisions, he submitted that no arbitrary addition to the income can be made based on dumb documents, loose papers containing scribbling, rough / vague notings: i) PCIT vs. Umesh Israni…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Trichy vs. Ramakrishna Poultry P Ltd, Karur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as Cross-Objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2349/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.N. Quadir HoseynFor Respondent: Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy
Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…by the Ld.CIT(A) by finding that the AO erred in making addition only upon the statement recorded of MD of assesse u/s.133A of the Act by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons reported in (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad) wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that “a statement recorded u/s.133A(3) of the Act does not have any evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement can’t be made the basis of addition“ which decision has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in [2012] 352 ITR 480 (SC). The Ld.CIT(A) also found substance in t…

M/S. Amrut Distilleries Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 950/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prateek P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sridhar E, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 133ASection 40A(3)

…which, in the absence of corroborative evidence lack evidentiary value, can never be equated with incriminating material unearthed during search proceedings to justify an assessment under Sec.153A. Please see the decisions in CIT vs. S. Khadar Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.), Paul Mathews and Sons v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 101 (Kerala), CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 60 taxmann.com 205 (Gujarat),AlankarJewellers vs. DCIT (ITAT Indore in ITA No.992/Ind/2019).Similarly, even material gathered during the assessment proceedings cannot be equated with incriminating material unearthed during search. 11. It is not in…

M/S. Amrut Distilleries Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 949/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prateek P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sridhar E, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 133ASection 40A(3)

…which, in the absence of corroborative evidence lack evidentiary value, can never be equated with incriminating material unearthed during search proceedings to justify an assessment under Sec.153A. Please see the decisions in CIT vs. S. Khadar Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.), Paul Mathews and Sons v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 101 (Kerala), CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 60 taxmann.com 205 (Gujarat),AlankarJewellers vs. DCIT (ITAT Indore in ITA No.992/Ind/2019).Similarly, even material gathered during the assessment proceedings cannot be equated with incriminating material unearthed during search. 11. It is not in…

M/S. Amrut Distilleries Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 948/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahuandshri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Prateek P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sridhar E, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 133ASection 40A(3)

…which, in the absence of corroborative evidence lack evidentiary value, can never be equated with incriminating material unearthed during search proceedings to justify an assessment under Sec.153A. Please see the decisions in CIT vs. S. Khadar Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.), Paul Mathews and Sons v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 101 (Kerala), CIT vs. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 60 taxmann.com 205 (Gujarat),AlankarJewellers vs. DCIT (ITAT Indore in ITA No.992/Ind/2019).Similarly, even material gathered during the assessment proceedings cannot be equated with incriminating material unearthed during search. 11. It is not in…

DCIT Cent. Circle 1(3), Nagpur vs. Mor Alloys Private Limited, Vizianagaram

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 18/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…s actual negotiated price and there is no suppression of sale value. I agree with the argument of the appellant that the addition solely based on statement recorded during action u/s 133A of the Act is not sustainable. Hon'ble Madras High Court in Income Tax (300 ITR 157), has held as unders Mathews and Sons V. Commissioner of"Section 133A(3) (iii) enables the authority to record the statement of any person which may may be useful for, ofirelevant to any proceeding under the Act. Section 133A However, enables the income-tax authority only to record any statement of any persoerson which may be useful but does not…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Cent. Circle-1(3), Central Circle, Aayakar Bhawan, Nagpur vs. Mor Alloys Private Limited, Vizianagaram

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 14/NAG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…suppression of sale value. I agree with the argument of the appellant that the addition solely based on statement recorded during action u/s 133A of the Act is not sustainable. Hon'ble Madras High Court in Paul Mathews and Sons V. Commissioner of Income Tax (300 ITR 157), has held as under- "Section 133A(3) (iii) enables the authority to record the statement of any person which may be useful for, or relevant to, any proceeding under the Act. Section 133A, however, enables the income-tax authority only to record any statement of any person which may be useful, but does not authorize taking any sworn statement. On…

Laxmi Narayan Packaging Industries, Guwahati vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1), Guwahati

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 60/GTY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati20 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 80

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण गुवाहाटी पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वर्ुअल कोटु] [Virtual Court] श्री दुव्वुरु आरएल रेड्डी, उपाध्यक्ष (कोलकाता क्षेत्र) एवं श्री राकेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT (KZ) & SRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 60/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Laxmi Narayan Packaging Income Tax Officer, Ward- Industries Vs. 2(1), Guwahati (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AADFL0516B Appearances: Assessee represented by: Ramesh Goenka Adv. Department represented by: Kausik Ray, JCIT Date of concluding the he…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -2, Surat vs. Shah Maganlal Gulabchand Choksi, Surat

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 224/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 131Section 250Section 271ASection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.197/SRT/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Shah Maganlal Gulabchand The ACIT, Vs. Choksi, Central Circle – 2, 3/138, Parsi Sheri, Navapura, Surat Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS5582Q (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.224/SRT/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) The ACIT, Shah Maganlal Gulabchand Central Circle – 2, Vs. Choksi, Surat 3/138, Parsi Sheri, Navapura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरस…

Shah Maganlal Gulabchand Choksi, Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat

In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 197/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 131Section 250Section 271ASection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.197/SRT/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Shah Maganlal Gulabchand The ACIT, Vs. Choksi, Central Circle – 2, 3/138, Parsi Sheri, Navapura, Surat Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS5582Q (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.224/SRT/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) The ACIT, Shah Maganlal Gulabchand Central Circle – 2, Vs. Choksi, Surat 3/138, Parsi Sheri, Navapura, Surat – 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरस…

Sh. Surendra Kumar Patni, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 977/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Surendra Kumar Patni, C/O. M/S. Kalani & Co., 5Th Floor, Milestone Building, Gandhi Nagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 015. Pan No.: Adupp9249 D ..... Appellant Vs. Acit, Circle-2, New Central Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 005. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Mr. P.C. Parwal, Ca, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2024 O R D E R Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A), Jaipur Dated 25.06.2024 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2017-18. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Mr. P.C. Parwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 69Section 69B

…on who made the admission to show that it is incorrect. The burden lies on the assessee to establish that the admission made in the statement at the time of survey was wrong and that there was no additional income. Judgment in CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son [2008] 300 ITR 157 (Mad.) is very important as Supreme Court also affirmed this judgment S. Khader Khan Son's case (supra) where it has been held that the statement, obtained under section 133A of the Act would not automatically bind upon the assessee. 17. In view of the above discussion on facts and law and further relying on the judicial pronouncements, the order…

Sachin Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 59/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…se statements/ documents, and without affording opportunity for cross examination. 13. It was held in the case of Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT reported in 263 ITR 101 (Ker) apex court judgment reported in 91 ITR 18 (SC) and CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son reported in 300 ITR 157 (Mad) no addition is called for also involved of CBDT Instruction. Section 133A of the Act empower any authority to examine any person on oath, and such statement has on evidentiary value and any admission made during the search statement cannot be itself be made the basis for addition. Unless, the A.O have corroborative material in the hand to m…

Kamal Kant Verma, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 53/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…se statements/ documents, and without affording opportunity for cross examination. 13. It was held in the case of Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT reported in 263 ITR 101 (Ker) apex court judgment reported in 91 ITR 18 (SC) and CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son reported in 300 ITR 157 (Mad) no addition is called for also involved of CBDT Instruction. Section 133A of the Act empower any authority to examine any person on oath, and such statement has on evidentiary value and any admission made during the search statement cannot be itself be made the basis for addition. Unless, the A.O have corroborative material in the hand to m…

M/S Standard Frozen Foods Exports Pvt Ltd, Hapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-II, Kanpur

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 45/LKW/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 153ASection 153D

…se statements/ documents, and without affording opportunity for cross examination. 13. It was held in the case of Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT reported in 263 ITR 101 (Ker) apex court judgment reported in 91 ITR 18 (SC) and CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son reported in 300 ITR 157 (Mad) no addition is called for also involved of CBDT Instruction. Section 133A of the Act empower any authority to examine any person on oath, and such statement has on evidentiary value and any admission made during the search statement cannot be itself be made the basis for addition. Unless, the A.O have corroborative material in the hand to m…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. Shri Vitthalbhai Madhavlal Patel, Gandhinagar

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1358/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…While arriving at the above conclusion, I have derived the judicial support from the cases relied upon by the appellant and also the cases relied on by me which are as under:- 1) Paul Matthews 263 ITR 101 (Ker) - Relied on by the appellant 2) S. Kahder Khan 300 ITR 157 (Mds) - Relied on by the appellant 3) S. Khader Khan 352 ITR 480 (SC) - Relied on by the appellant 4) DCIT VS. Bansal Credits Ltd. decided by the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi (2016) 74Taxmann.com 224 (Delhi IΤΑΤ) 6.6 Considering the above judicial pronouncements relied on by the undersigned on the core issue of validity of retraction of the admitted di…

Shri Vitthalbhai Madhavlal Patel, Gandhinagar vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1247/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)

…While arriving at the above conclusion, I have derived the judicial support from the cases relied upon by the appellant and also the cases relied on by me which are as under:- 1) Paul Matthews 263 ITR 101 (Ker) - Relied on by the appellant 2) S. Kahder Khan 300 ITR 157 (Mds) - Relied on by the appellant 3) S. Khader Khan 352 ITR 480 (SC) - Relied on by the appellant 4) DCIT VS. Bansal Credits Ltd. decided by the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi (2016) 74Taxmann.com 224 (Delhi IΤΑΤ) 6.6 Considering the above judicial pronouncements relied on by the undersigned on the core issue of validity of retraction of the admitted di…

G.R.M. Constructions, Namakkal vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1979/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 149Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद' के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1 2013-14 GRM Constructions, 2 2014-15 6-A, Salem Road, The Asst. CIT, 3 2015-16 Kalangani PO, Central Circle, 4. 2016-17 Namakkal – 637014. Salem 5. 2017-18 [PAN: AACFG 4873D] 6. 2018-19 7. 2019-20 8. 2020-21 अपीलाथ) की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCA +,थ) की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुन…

G.R.M. Constructions, Namakkal vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Salem

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1976/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 149Section 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद' के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sr. Appeal Numbers Assessment Appellant Respondent No Years 1 2013-14 GRM Constructions, 2 2014-15 6-A, Salem Road, The Asst. CIT, 3 2015-16 Kalangani PO, Central Circle, 4. 2016-17 Namakkal – 637014. Salem 5. 2017-18 [PAN: AACFG 4873D] 6. 2018-19 7. 2019-20 8. 2020-21 अपीलाथ) की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCA +,थ) की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुन…

Punihani International, New Delhi vs. DCIT Special Range- 10, New Delhi

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

ITA 1734/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarpunihani International, Vs. Dcit, W-143, Greater Kailash-2, Special Range-10, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaafp6858K

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhavi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Banita Devi Naorem, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69B

…y concluded that the addition of Rs 2.50 crores had been merely made based on survey statement, which does not carry any evidentiary value. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon‟ble Madras High Court in the case of S.Khader Khan reported in 300 ITR 157 (Mad), wherein it was held that :- Punihani International “An admission is an extremely important piece of evidence , but it cannot be said that it is conclusive and it is open to the person , who made it, to show it has incorrectly been made and the person, making the statement should be given proper opportunity to show that it does not show the…