CIT v. Sunil Aggarwal

64 Taxmann.com 107High Court2015#944 most cited

What is CIT v. Sunil Aggarwal authority for?

An addition of an unexplained cash credit based solely on an assessee's retracted admission made during a search and seizure operation is not justified, especially if the assessee later provides verifiable explanations.

113

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sunil Aggarwal · section 132(4) · retracted statement · undisclosed income · search and seizure · unexplained cash credit · addition not justified · incriminating evidence · verification of accounts

Also reported as

237 Taxmann 512

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132(4)Section 147Section 132Section 153ASection 148Section 68Section 133A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

place of effective managementsection 6(3)section 127(1)legal expensessurrender of incomeshell companystatement under section 132(4)retracted statementsection 131(1a)retraction of statementpeak credit theoryddt

Judgments citing CIT v. Sunil Aggarwal

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Bhushan Dua, Delhi

ITA 2950/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 2756/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, Delhi

ITA 2714/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, Delhi

ITA 2713/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Delhi vs. Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 2512/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Delhi vs. Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited, Delhi

ITA 2511/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Delhi vs. Bhushan Dua, New Delhi

ITA 2510/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, Delhi vs. Bhushan Dua, New Delhi

ITA 2509/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Jayantilal Rajmal Seth, Mumbai vs. DCIT-CC-4(3), Mumbai

ITA 3260/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jayantilal Rajmal Seth, Dcit-Cc-4(3), A-3, Saibaba Shopping Centre, Bkc, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai Central, Vs. Mumbai-400008. Pan No. Agepj 0499 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Jayant Bhat
Section 139(5)Section 148Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Jayantilal Rajmal Seth, DCIT-CC-4(3), A-3, Saibaba Shopping Centre, BKC, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai Central, Vs. Mumbai-400008. PAN NO. AGEPJ 0499 E Appellant Respondent : Mr. Jayant Bhat Assessee by : Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR Revenue by : 18/09/2025 Date of Hearing : 22/09/2025 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against revisional order dated 30.03.2025 passed by the Ld. Princip…

Surya Singhal, Kota vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 928/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

…nvestigation Circle, Salem, (2011) 13 Taxmann.com 49 (Madras) wherein retraction made during the course of assessment proceedings was entertained and relief was granted on merits of the explanation. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Sunil Aggarwal, 64 Taxmann.com 107 held that addition cannot be made merely on the basis of the statement which is subsequently retracted even belatedly. It is also noted that The appellant also placed reliance on the following judgments to support his submission :- (a) Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre Limited Vs DCIT (TDS) JP (2017) 87 taxmann.com 184 (Rajasthan…

Superdeal Resources Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 726/KOL/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Superdeal Resources Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Wad 5(1), Kolkata C/O Subash Agarwal & Ito, Ward 5(1), Associates, Advocates Sidha Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite Vs. Chowringhee Square, 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-70069 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcs7472E Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM Superdeal Resources Pvt. Ltd. ITO, Wad 5(1), Kolkata C/o Subash Agarwal & ITO, Ward 5(1), Associates, Advocates Sidha Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite Vs. Chowringhee Square, 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-70069 West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCS7472E Assessee by : Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AR Revenue by : Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR Date of hearing: 30.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 16.09.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by th…

Mahendra Singh Ratnawat, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 223/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 37Section 44ASection 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री गगन गोयल, लेखा सदस्य, के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 223/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sh. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat 53 Golimar Garden, Sahkar Marg, Bais Godam, Jaipur. बनाम Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs. Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur. स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AFBPR0768Q अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri S.R. Sharma, C.A.,…

Income Tax Officer Ward 52(1) New Delhi, New Delhi vs. M/S Novel Infratech, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 188/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sudhir Kumarito, Vs. M/S. Novel Infratech, Ward-52(1), Flat No. 915, Indra Prakash New Delhi Building, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajfn0187A

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…Vs. Harjeev Aggarwal 70 taxmann.com 95 (Del) A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT VS. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del) Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from records and books of account and Assessing Off…

Professional Automotives Private Limited, Jammu vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 812/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

…ngs was entertained and relief was granted on merits of the explanation. It is argued that additions cannot be made merely on the basis of statements which are subsequently retracted even belatedly as held by Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal, (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Delhi). Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Escorts Heart Institute and ResearchCentre Limited Vs. DCIT (TDS) JP, (2017) 87 Taxmann.com 184 Rajasthan; Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) and argued that if two views are possible, the view in favour of the assessee should be pre…

Little Scholars Academy, Amroha vs. ACIT Central Circle, Moradabad

The appeal is allowed

ITA 1966/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari &For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(6)Section 115BSection 127Section 12ASection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Little Scholars Academy, Vs ACIT (Central), 0, Joya Road, Moradabad. Amroha, Uttar Pradesh – 244 221. PAN: AAATL3331R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mayank Patawari & Shri Akash Ojha, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 17.05.2023 of the Commissioner o…

Mohit Gupta HUF, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 44(6), Delhi

ITA 2511/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2018-19 A.Y. 2019-20

…2. CITVs.HarjeevAggarwal70taxmann.com95(Del} A statement recorded under section 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating evidence of undisclosed income unearthed during search 3. CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Del} Where assessee during search conducted under section 132 made admission that a sum of Rs. 86 lakhs seized from his employee belonged to him and it represented undisclosed income and subsequently he retracted above admission and offered an explanation that said amount was verifiable from record and books of account and Assessing Off…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 120/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 153A

…ngs was entertained and relief was granted on merits of the explanation. It is argued that additions cannot be made merely on the basis of statements which are subsequently retracted even belatedly as held by Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal, (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Delhi). Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre Limited Vs. DCIT (TDS) JP, (2017) 87 Taxmann.com 184 Rajasthan, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) and argued that if two views are possible, the view in favour of the assessee should be pr…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 119/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 153A

…ngs was entertained and relief was granted on merits of the explanation. It is argued that additions cannot be made merely on the basis of statements which are subsequently retracted even belatedly as held by Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal, (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Delhi). Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre Limited Vs. DCIT (TDS) JP, (2017) 87 Taxmann.com 184 Rajasthan, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) and argued that if two views are possible, the view in favour of the assessee should be pr…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 118/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 153A

…ngs was entertained and relief was granted on merits of the explanation. It is argued that additions cannot be made merely on the basis of statements which are subsequently retracted even belatedly as held by Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal, (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Delhi). Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre Limited Vs. DCIT (TDS) JP, (2017) 87 Taxmanın.com 184 Rajasthan, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) and argued that if two views are possible, the view in favour of the assessee should be p…

Jaipal Singh, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee are disposed off

ITA 116/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 153A

…ngs was entertained and relief was granted on merits of the explanation. It is argued that additions cannot be made merely on the basis of statements which are subsequently retracted even belatedly as held by Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sunil Aggarwal, (2015) 64 Taxmann.com 107 (Delhi). Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre Limited Vs. DCIT (TDS) JP, (2017) 87 Taxmanın.com 184 Rajasthan, Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. (1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) and argued that if two views are possible, the view in favour of the assessee should be p…