CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

352 ITR 480Supreme Court of India2013#100 most cited

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

Statements recorded during a survey under Section 133A do not have evidentiary value as Section 133A does not empower examination on oath. Consequently, additions to income cannot be made solely based on such uncorroborated statements without other credible evidence.

581

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son · Section 133A · survey proceedings · evidentiary value · statement on oath · corroborative evidence · additions to income · uncorroborated statement · basis of assessment · Section 131 · retracted statement

Also reported as

25 Taxmann.com 413254 CTR 22825 Taxmann 413

Sections most often in play

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 131Section 147Section 132(4)Section 132Section 153ASection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 133a(3)(iii)survey under section 133aretracted statementsection 158bbstatement under section 132(4)section 133asection 133section 292cblock periodsection 132(4)loose paperssection 131

Judgments citing CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

LAL CHAND CHOUDHARY,JAISALMER vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE, BARMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 840/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelal Chand Choudhary Acit/ Dcit, Circle, S-8, Transport Nagar, Barmer Jaisalmer - 345001 Pan No. Aaopc 6671 K Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Revenue By Shri Lalit Kumar Bishnoi, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 09.04.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.:

Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 68Section 69A

…2003 IT(Inv) dated 10/03/2003 and disregarded the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v/s S. Kader Khan Son reported in 300 ITR 157 (Mad) which was approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s S. Kader Khan Son reported in 352 ITR 480 and CIT and V/s Vijay Nagindas Mehta Hon'ble 13 Asst. Year: 2017-18 Supreme Court Reported on 335 ITR (ST) 1, that the appellant firm is also assessed to tax with VAT authority. 26. We find that the sales and purchase made by appellant firm are duly disclosed before VAT authority and genuineness of such business activities had not been doubted…

SHRI NARAYAN RAO HEBRI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/166/2025HC Karnataka20 Feb 2026

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 260Section 260A

…2025 11.2 Learned counsel for the Assessee has relied on the following judgments; (i) Commissioner of Income Tax vs. S. Khader Khan Son, [2008] 300 ITR 157 (Madras) (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax, Salem vs. S. Khader Khan Son, [2013] 352 ITR 480 (SC) (iii) Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, [1973] 91 ITR 18 (SC) (iv) The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax- Central-3 vs. ARN Infrastructure Ltd., 2023- TIOL-1098-HC-DEL-IT (v) Commissioner of Income-tax-1 vs. Mantri Share Brokers (P.) Ltd., [2018] 96 taxmann.com 279 (Rajasthan) (vi) Kailash…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, AMRITSAR vs. MESERS VARUN TRADERS , AMRITSAR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 786/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…statement was made under pressure and coercion. It could be seen that when the survey statement has been retracted without short period of time, the same would lose evidentiary value. In fact, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons (25 Taxmann.com 413) affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court (reported as 300 ITR 157) held that Sec.133 do not empower examination on oath. Therefore, statement recorded u/s 133A would have no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. This decision clearly supports the case of the assessee.…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR vs. SHRI PAWAN KUMAR , AMRITSAR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 785/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…statement was made under pressure and coercion. It could be seen that when the survey statement has been retracted without short period of time, the same would lose evidentiary value. In fact, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons (25 Taxmann.com 413) affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court (reported as 300 ITR 157) held that Sec.133 do not empower examination on oath. Therefore, statement recorded u/s 133A would have no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. This decision clearly supports the case of the assessee.…

ASSIATENT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, AMRITSAR vs. SHRI MUKESH SHINGARI, AMRITSAR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 781/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…statement was made under pressure and coercion. It could be seen that when the survey statement has been retracted without short period of time, the same would lose evidentiary value. In fact, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons (25 Taxmann.com 413) affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court (reported as 300 ITR 157) held that Sec.133 do not empower examination on oath. Therefore, statement recorded u/s 133A would have no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. This decision clearly supports the case of the assessee.…

SHRI PAWAN KUMAR,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRITSAR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 778/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…statement was made under pressure and coercion. It could be seen that when the survey statement has been retracted without short period of time, the same would lose evidentiary value. In fact, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons (25 Taxmann.com 413) affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court (reported as 300 ITR 157) held that Sec.133 do not empower examination on oath. Therefore, statement recorded u/s 133A would have no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. This decision clearly supports the case of the assessee.…

M/S VARUN TRADERS,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , AMRITSAR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 777/ASR/2017[M/S VARUN TRADERS]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…statement was made under pressure and coercion. It could be seen that when the survey statement has been retracted without short period of time, the same would lose evidentiary value. In fact, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons (25 Taxmann.com 413) affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court (reported as 300 ITR 157) held that Sec.133 do not empower examination on oath. Therefore, statement recorded u/s 133A would have no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. This decision clearly supports the case of the assessee.…

SHRI MUKESH SHINGARI,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR

In the result, the revenue’s appeal ITA No

ITA 776/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar11 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Udayan Dasgupta, Jm

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144A

…statement was made under pressure and coercion. It could be seen that when the survey statement has been retracted without short period of time, the same would lose evidentiary value. In fact, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan Sons (25 Taxmann.com 413) affirming the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court (reported as 300 ITR 157) held that Sec.133 do not empower examination on oath. Therefore, statement recorded u/s 133A would have no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. This decision clearly supports the case of the assessee.…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. M/S RADAAN MEDIA WORKS INDIA LIMITED, TEYNAMPET

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2136/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2136/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 V. Acit, M/S Radaan Media Works Central Circle 2(1), India Limited, Chennai-600034 14 Jayammal Road, Chennai -600018 [Pan: Aabcr3815L] (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(44)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153CSection 69C

…tive ACIT Vs M/s Radaan Media Works India Limited :: 10 :: evidence to establish that the amounts constituted unexplained expenditure or unaccounted income of the assessee. Relying on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (352 ITR 480) and Common Cause v. Union of India, it was contended that statements recorded during survey proceedings have no evidentiary value unless supported by tangible material. The loose sheet relied upon by the AO, by itself, does not establish undisclosed income, especially when the transactions are already reflected in the books. It was further s…

SUPRIYA ROY,AGARTALA vs. ITO, WARD-1, AGARTALA, AGARTALA

ITA 101/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am (Through : Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.101/Gty/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year 2018-2019) Vs. Ito Ward-1, Agartala Supriya Roy, Ram Thakur Trading, Central Road, Agartala, Tripura-799001 Pan No.: Acbpr 7501 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Mody, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2026 आदेश / Order Per George Mathan, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Id. Addl./Jcit(A)-2, Chennai, Dated 13.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. At The Time Of Hearing The Ld.Ar Drew Our Attention To Pages 9 To 16 Of The Paper Book Which Was Copy Of The Written Submission Filed. The Same Reads As Follows:- 2

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mody, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69A

…rate and further addition of Rs. 9,94,500/- as business income has been made in the assessment, which not only on facts amounts to double addition but is also bad in law and legally impermissible. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Khader Khan Son (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC) has upheld the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case reported in (2008) 300 ITR 157, wherein in has been held that:- "Sec. 133A does not empower any IT authority to examine any person on oath, hence, any such statement has no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot, by itself, be made the basis f…

GARGI OVERSEAS PVT LTD,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 91/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumargargi Overseas Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 2623-A, Naya Bazar, Delhi Ward-10(1), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacg3165F

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68Section 69C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Gargi Overseas Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 2623-A, Naya Bazar, Delhi Ward-10(1), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAACG3165F Assessee by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA Shri Ankur Agarwal, Adv Revenue by: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing 09/12/2025 Date of pronouncement 30/01/2026 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No. 91/Del/2025 for AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. GOLDEN GOENKA CREDIT PRIVATE LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1799/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

…ed u/s. 132(4) is presumed to be correct in the hands of the maker of such statement. Similarly a statement made u/s. 133A or 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has no evidentiary value as held by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of S. Kader Khan Sons (2012) 352 ITR 480 (SC). Therefore, it is important for an AO to bring on record what has said in the statement, against whom, in which proceedings, whether the third party Assessee was named in such 8 Golden Goenka Credit Pvt. Ltd statement, how and in what capacity such person was having legal and statutory right to give a statement with respect to a corporate e…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. VIVEK GUPTA, KOLKATA

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection is partly allowed

ITA 1592/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 250Section 68

…s of retracted statement and also that no addition can be made by re- lying upon the statement recorded during survey unless there is corrobo- rative material. The Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Khader Khan Son (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC), wherein it has been held that statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no eviden- tiary value and no admission made during such statement cannot be ba- sis of addition. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of CIT, Del- hi Vs. Ms. Mayawati, 338 ITR 563, dated 03.08.2011, wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that the ca…

NARESH ARORA,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3144/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumararti Garg, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 31, A – 19, Guru Ram Dass Nagar, Delhi. Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Akupg4398A) Naresh Arora, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 31, A-061, 6Th Floor, Spaze Privy, Delhi. Sector 72, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aacpa3657P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, Advocate Shri Vaibhav Srivastava, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Order : 14.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 65BSection 69Section 69C

…(xii) CIT v. Anil Khandelwal [ITA Nos.247 & 248/2012 decided 21.04.2015]; (xiii) Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC); (xiv) Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker.); (xv) CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC); (xvi) Pushkar Narain Sarraj v. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 388 (All.); (xvii) P.R. Metrani v. CIT, Bangalore (2006) 157 taxman 325 (SC); (xviii) CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC); (xix) CIT v. Kanpur Coat Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC). 5. The same is rebutted by the Department by contending that it is an admitted piece of evi…

ARIT GARG,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3143/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumararti Garg, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 31, A – 19, Guru Ram Dass Nagar, Delhi. Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Akupg4398A) Naresh Arora, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 31, A-061, 6Th Floor, Spaze Privy, Delhi. Sector 72, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aacpa3657P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, Advocate Shri Vaibhav Srivastava, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Order : 14.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 65BSection 69Section 69C

…(xii) CIT v. Anil Khandelwal [ITA Nos.247 & 248/2012 decided 21.04.2015]; (xiii) Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC); (xiv) Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker.); (xv) CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC); (xvi) Pushkar Narain Sarraj v. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 388 (All.); (xvii) P.R. Metrani v. CIT, Bangalore (2006) 157 taxman 325 (SC); (xviii) CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC); (xix) CIT v. Kanpur Coat Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC). 5. The same is rebutted by the Department by contending that it is an admitted piece of evi…

DCIT, KOLKATA vs. SUJIT ARYA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 751/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Sujit Arya Dcit P-3, Paramathesh Barun Sarani, 3, Govt Place West, Kolkata- New Cit Road, Central Metro, Vs. 700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700073, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Actpa8796J Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133A

…uring the course of the search or on investigations". As regards to the evidentiary value of the statement recorded in survey proceedings u/s 133A of the Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Salem v. S Khader Khan 352 ITR 480 (SC) has held that statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition unless and until supported by some other corroborative evidence. There is also merit in the submission of the appellant that the survey party has not found a single piece of evidence exce…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,SATARA CIRCLE,SATARA, SATARA vs. KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LIMITED, SATARA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1392/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR and Manish M. Mehta
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

…evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made the basis of addition. He submitted that the SLP filed by the Revenue against the order of Hon’ble Madras High Court was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as reported in (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC). 14. Referring to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dhingra Metal Works reported in (2010) 328 ITR 384 (Del), he submitted that the Hon’ble High Court in the said decision has held that for a statement to have evidentiary value, the survey officer should have been authorized to administer oath and to record swo…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA vs. KAY BOUVET ENGINEERING LIMITED, SATARA

ITA 1374/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar &
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

…evidentiary value and any admission made during such statement cannot be made the basis of addition. He submitted that the SLP filed by the Revenue against the order of Hon'ble Madras High Court was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported in (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC). 14. Referring to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dhingra Metal Works reported in (2010) 328 ITR 384 (Del), he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that for a statement to have evidentiary value, the survey officer should have been authorized to administer oath and to record swor…

ALPESH CHANDULAL MODI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 16 (2) (1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5748/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 292C

…rative material showing that the assessee had paid cash of Rs.67,00,000/- over and above the sale consideration of Rs.65,00,000/-. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs S. Khader Khan Son ([2012] (352 ITR 480) (SC)). It is also noticed that the assessee has purchased the flat for a consideration which is more than the stamp duty value of Rs.64,09,575 (page 22 of paper book) and that the addition of Rs.67,00,000 over and above the stamp duty value without any material evidence does not bear any logic. In view of the above discussion and considering all…

V S A INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 906/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…g the course of survey to support the additions made towards subcontract expenditure. It is well-established principle of law by the decision of various Courts, including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Khader Khan and Sons (2012) 352 ITR 480 that, additions cannot be made only on the basis of statement recorded during the course of survey, if such addition is not based on any corroborative evidences. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that, the A.O. has not brought on record any material to support the settled legal position. 20. Insofar as the statemen…

Showing 1–20 of 581 · Page 1 of 30

...