CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

352 ITR 480Supreme Court of India2013#104 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 366,005 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

Kalpana Medical Centre Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

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

ITA 347/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumarअपील अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No.2847, 2848/Mds/2014 & 347/Mds/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008,2008-2009 & 2009-10 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…there was no material on the basis of which AO came to such belief. It cannot be said that the sworn statement collected from assessee u/s 133A can be the basis for reopening of assessment. The Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Khadar Khan and Sons Vs CIT (352 ITR 480) (SC), held that Sworn Statement recorded from the assessee u/s 133A cannot be basis for addition. Hence, there is no basis for reopening of assessment. Thus reopening of assessment is bad in law as held in the case of ITO Vs Madan Ali Engineering Works Limited (118 ITR 1) (SC). Similar view was taken at Bombay High Court in the case of Samir…

Kalpana Medical Centre Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

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

ITA 2848/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumarअपील अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No.2847, 2848/Mds/2014 & 347/Mds/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008,2008-2009 & 2009-10 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…there was no material on the basis of which AO came to such belief. It cannot be said that the sworn statement collected from assessee u/s 133A can be the basis for reopening of assessment. The Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Khadar Khan and Sons Vs CIT (352 ITR 480) (SC), held that Sworn Statement recorded from the assessee u/s 133A cannot be basis for addition. Hence, there is no basis for reopening of assessment. Thus reopening of assessment is bad in law as held in the case of ITO Vs Madan Ali Engineering Works Limited (118 ITR 1) (SC). Similar view was taken at Bombay High Court in the case of Samir…

Kalpana Medical Centre Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

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

ITA 2847/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumarअपील अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A. No.2847, 2848/Mds/2014 & 347/Mds/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008,2008-2009 & 2009-10 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar
Section 132Section 133ASection 147Section 148

…there was no material on the basis of which AO came to such belief. It cannot be said that the sworn statement collected from assessee u/s 133A can be the basis for reopening of assessment. The Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Khadar Khan and Sons Vs CIT (352 ITR 480) (SC), held that Sworn Statement recorded from the assessee u/s 133A cannot be basis for addition. Hence, there is no basis for reopening of assessment. Thus reopening of assessment is bad in law as held in the case of ITO Vs Madan Ali Engineering Works Limited (118 ITR 1) (SC). Similar view was taken at Bombay High Court in the case of Samir…

Swastik Realtors, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 15(3), Mumbai

ITA 800/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ita Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481(Gau. HC), CIT v. Jai Kumar Bakliwal (2014) 366 ITR 217(Raj. HC), CIT v. Nemichand Kothari (2003) 264 ITR 254(Gau. HC), CIT v. Shiv Dhooti Pearls and Investment Limited(2016) 237 Taxman 104(Del HC), CIT v. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480(SC) . Our attention was also drawn to instruction no. F.No. 286/2/2003-IT(Inv.) dated 10-03-2003 issued by CBDT with respect to confessions of additional income during search and survey operations wherein CBDT instructed the officers conducting search and surveys not to extract forcible confessions and rather focus on collecting evidences. The le…

Swastik Realtors, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T.15(3), Mumbai

ITA 6314/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.800/Mum/2012 & 6314/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 & 2008-09) Swastik Realtors The Assistant बनाम/ 312, Swastik Disha Commissioner Of Income V. Corporate Park , Kohinoor Tax – 15(3), Textile Printing Compound Matru Mandir I T Office Opp. Shreyas Cinema, Lbs Nana Chowk Marg, Ghatkopar(W) Grant Road Mumbai-400 086 Mumbai. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Abafs2576A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ita Bharali (2014) 361 ITR 481(Gau. HC), CIT v. Jai Kumar Bakliwal (2014) 366 ITR 217(Raj. HC), CIT v. Nemichand Kothari (2003) 264 ITR 254(Gau. HC), CIT v. Shiv Dhooti Pearls and Investment Limited(2016) 237 Taxman 104(Del HC), CIT v. Khader Khan Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480(SC) . Our attention was also drawn to instruction no. F.No. 286/2/2003-IT(Inv.) dated 10-03-2003 issued by CBDT with respect to confessions of additional income during search and survey operations wherein CBDT instructed the officers conducting search and surveys not to extract forcible confessions and rather focus on collecting evidences. The le…

M/S. Raiganj R.C.C. Spun Pipe Industries Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Dinajpur vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-2, Jalpaiguri

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2163/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Divakar Chakraborty, JCIT
Section 131Section 133A

…nsel for the assessee pointed ITA No.2163/Kol/2014- M/s. Raniganj R.C.C. Spun Pipe Industries Pvt. Ltd. A.Y.2010-11 out that the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs S.Khader Khan Son 352 ITR 480 (SC). The ld. DR placed reliance on the order of AO/.CIT(A). 13. I have given a very careful consideration to the rival submissions. From a perusal of the AO as well as CIT(A)m it is clear that the basis of making the impugned addition is only a statement recorded on 19.03.2010 u/s 131 of the Act which is after conclusion of the survey u/s 133A…

Raju B Doshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1033/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…d that, the statement recorded under section 133A was not a sworn statement; therefore, it does not have any evidentiary value. In support, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan and Sons reported in, [2012] 254 CTR 228 and decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Uttamchand Jain in ITA No.634 of 2009 12 राजू बी दोषी Raju B Doshi ITA 1483/Mum/2011 and 06 other Group appeals order dated 2nd July, 2009. The assessee had filed an affidavit before CIT (A) retracting the statement given during the course of survey, the copy of which has been plac…

Raju B Doshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(2)(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1032/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…d that, the statement recorded under section 133A was not a sworn statement; therefore, it does not have any evidentiary value. In support, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan and Sons reported in, [2012] 254 CTR 228 and decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Uttamchand Jain in ITA No.634 of 2009 12 राजू बी दोषी Raju B Doshi ITA 1483/Mum/2011 and 06 other Group appeals order dated 2nd July, 2009. The assessee had filed an affidavit before CIT (A) retracting the statement given during the course of survey, the copy of which has been plac…

Raju B. Doshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1484/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…d that, the statement recorded under section 133A was not a sworn statement; therefore, it does not have any evidentiary value. In support, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan and Sons reported in, [2012] 254 CTR 228 and decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Uttamchand Jain in ITA No.634 of 2009 12 राजू बी दोषी Raju B Doshi ITA 1483/Mum/2011 and 06 other Group appeals order dated 2nd July, 2009. The assessee had filed an affidavit before CIT (A) retracting the statement given during the course of survey, the copy of which has been plac…

Raju B. Doshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1483/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…d that, the statement recorded under section 133A was not a sworn statement; therefore, it does not have any evidentiary value. In support, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan and Sons reported in, [2012] 254 CTR 228 and decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Uttamchand Jain in ITA No.634 of 2009 12 राजू बी दोषी Raju B Doshi ITA 1483/Mum/2011 and 06 other Group appeals order dated 2nd July, 2009. The assessee had filed an affidavit before CIT (A) retracting the statement given during the course of survey, the copy of which has been plac…

Raju B. Doshi, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1482/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…d that, the statement recorded under section 133A was not a sworn statement; therefore, it does not have any evidentiary value. In support, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan and Sons reported in, [2012] 254 CTR 228 and decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Uttamchand Jain in ITA No.634 of 2009 12 राजू बी दोषी Raju B Doshi ITA 1483/Mum/2011 and 06 other Group appeals order dated 2nd July, 2009. The assessee had filed an affidavit before CIT (A) retracting the statement given during the course of survey, the copy of which has been plac…

Shri Raju B. Doshi, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1458/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R C Sharma & Shri Amit Shukla

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…d that, the statement recorded under section 133A was not a sworn statement; therefore, it does not have any evidentiary value. In support, he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. S. Khader Khan and Sons reported in, [2012] 254 CTR 228 and decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Uttamchand Jain in ITA No.634 of 2009 12 राजू बी दोषी Raju B Doshi ITA 1483/Mum/2011 and 06 other Group appeals order dated 2nd July, 2009. The assessee had filed an affidavit before CIT (A) retracting the statement given during the course of survey, the copy of which has been plac…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Bansal Credits Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3918/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Ms. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamblems. Suchitra Kamble Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Jain, DRFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate
Section 133ASection 68

…e addition cannot be based upon the statement. Similar view was expressed by Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. S. Khader Khan Son [2008] 300 ITR 157 (Madras). The decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court is approved by Hon’ble Apex Court in [2012] 254 CTR 228 (SC). He further submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee produced all the evidences in support of the genuineness of credit. The evidences produced by the assessee were more than 7,000 pages. The Assessing Officer, though acknowledged the production of evidences, but simply rejected by mentioning that “I do not fi…

Shine Star Impex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir (42), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

ITA 4350/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written submissionFor Respondent: Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “फी” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. CIT, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1st Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. AALCS 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09…

Shine Star Impex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir (42), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

ITA 4349/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written submissionFor Respondent: Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “फी” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. CIT, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1st Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. AALCS 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09…

Sunshine Import & Exports P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir (42), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee’s are allowed in part

ITA 4348/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Shine Star Impex Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Cit, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1St Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aalcs 3998 R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written Submission प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke सुनवाई की तायीख / : 19.7.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तायीख / : .9.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per R. C. Sharma, A. M.:

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya – Written submissionFor Respondent: Shri Uday Bhaskar Jakke
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “फी” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4347 & 4348/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Sunshine Import & Exports Pvt. Ltd. Dy. CIT, Central Circle (42), बिाम/ 28/3, Shree Ramniwas, 1st Bhatwadi, Mumbai Vs. Opera House, Mumbai-400 004 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. AALCS 1023 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : & आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. Nos.4349 & 4350/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2008-09…

Sri. Tulasiram, Channapatna vs. ITO, Mandya

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

ITA 537/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Bipin C. N, JCIT
Section 131Section 133A

…ely based on the statements recorded during the course of survey would not stand since such statements had no evidentiary value. Ld. AR pointed out that SLP filed by the Department against the said judgment was dismissed on 20.09.2012 and reported as (2013) 352 ITR 480. Further reliance was also placed on Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works [(2010) 328 ITR 384]. 05. Per contra, Ld. DR submitted that the additions were not solely based on the statements recorded u/s.131 of the Act. According to him there were two statements recorded from the assessee. In the second statement al…

ACIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai vs. Pravin B. Bhandarkar, Mumbai

ITA 6672/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.7089/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, Vs. Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acnpn 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.7364/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, 400020 Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acnpn 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6671/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Prakash B. Bandarkar, Room 400020 No.1, Baburao Chawl, Hanuman Takadi, Bhandup (W), Mumbai- 400078 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahlpb 1306 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 6672/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Pravin B. Bandarkar, Room 400020 No.1, Baburao Chawl, Hanuman Takadi, Bhandup (W), Mumbai- 400078 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahlpb 1306 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri Vijay Mehta राज"व क" क" ओर क" क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri C.W.Angolkar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2016 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2016

Section 143(3)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई "यायपीठ "यायपीठ ‘सी’, मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई मुंबई । मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.7089/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, Vs. ACIT, CC-32, Mumbai- Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ACNPN 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.…

ACIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai vs. Prakash B Bhandarkar, Mumbai

ITA 6671/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.7089/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, Vs. Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acnpn 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.7364/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, 400020 Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acnpn 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6671/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Prakash B. Bandarkar, Room 400020 No.1, Baburao Chawl, Hanuman Takadi, Bhandup (W), Mumbai- 400078 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahlpb 1306 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 6672/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Pravin B. Bandarkar, Room 400020 No.1, Baburao Chawl, Hanuman Takadi, Bhandup (W), Mumbai- 400078 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahlpb 1306 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri Vijay Mehta राज"व क" क" ओर क" क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri C.W.Angolkar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2016 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2016

Section 143(3)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई "यायपीठ "यायपीठ ‘सी’, मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई मुंबई । मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.7089/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, Vs. ACIT, CC-32, Mumbai- Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ACNPN 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai vs. Pandoo P. Naig, Mumbai

ITA 7364/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.7089/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, Vs. Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acnpn 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.7364/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, 400020 Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Acnpn 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6671/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Prakash B. Bandarkar, Room 400020 No.1, Baburao Chawl, Hanuman Takadi, Bhandup (W), Mumbai- 400078 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahlpb 1306 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 6672/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Cc-32, Mumbai- Vs. Pravin B. Bandarkar, Room 400020 No.1, Baburao Chawl, Hanuman Takadi, Bhandup (W), Mumbai- 400078 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahlpb 1306 N (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri Vijay Mehta राज"व क" क" ओर क" क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri C.W.Angolkar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 04/04/2016 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2016

Section 143(3)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई "यायपीठ "यायपीठ ‘सी’, मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई मुंबई । मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.7089/Mum/2011 (िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09) वष" Shri Pandoo P. Naig, 96-98, Vs. ACIT, CC-32, Mumbai- Mint Road, Mumbai-400001 400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ACNPN 2800 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.…