Deepchand & Co. v. Asstt. CIT

51 TTJ 421Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1995#5067 most cited

What is Deepchand & Co. v. Asstt. CIT authority for?

Statements recorded during assessment proceedings, especially those with standardized concluding declarations, are not automatically accepted as true, particularly if they are later retracted and appear to have been made under pressure or coercion.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Deepchand & Co. v. Asstt. CIT · 51 TTJ 421 · retracted statement · voluntary statement · undue influence · coercion · pressure · assessment procedure · ITAT

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69ASection 131(1A)Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

section 134gaarsection 9(1)(ii)section 108section 80absection 194qsection 73section 43(5)section 158bb(1)clarificatory amendmentretracted statementwarrant of authorisation

Judgments citing Deepchand & Co. v. Asstt. CIT

The ACIT Cen Cir-13, Mumbai vs. Shri Suresh V. Jain, Mumbai

Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5091/MUM/2007[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 5091/Mum/2007 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2005-06)

For Appellant: Shri L. K. S. DehiyaFor Respondent: ShriRajiv Khandelwal
Section 132(1)Section 153A

…nt are supported by the following cases laws a) Pullangode Rubber Produce Co.Ltd. vs. State ofKerala: [91ITR 18 (SC)] b) Kishanlal Shiv Chand Rai vs. CIT [88 ITR 293 (P&H)] c) Sri Krishna vs. Kurukshetra University [AIR (1976) SC376] d) Dipchand& Co. vs. CIT [51 TTJ 421] e) PushpaVihar vs. CIT [48 TTJ 389] f) Kishore Meswani vs. CIT g) J.R.Boda& Co. Pvt.Ltd. vs. CIT h) NageshNavalgund vs. CIT(A) i)Suresh Chandra Agarwal vs. ACIT- ITA No7900/Bom/92. 3. In addition to the above the Appellant wants to place further reliance on the judgment of the AP High Court in the case of CIT 58 I.T.A. No. 5091 & 4198/Mum/2007 &…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed and the

ITA 533/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.S. Sainia.Y. : 2009-10 Smt. Sushmita Gupta, Vs. Acit, Cc-2, 100, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 003 (Pan: Aczpg1440P) (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y. : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-32(1), Vs. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, Room No. 323, 3Rd Floor, 100, Sunder Nagar, Ara Centre New Delhi – 110 003 Jhandewalan Extn., (Pan: Aczpg1440P) New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 132(4)

…under section 132(4) - Whether merely on basis of admission, assessee could be subjected to such addition, when despite retraction revenue could not furnish any corroborative evidence in support of . such admission - Held, no Deepchand& Co.v. ACIT, (1995) 51 TTJ 421, ITAT Bombay Bench “We have examined the facts of the case. We have considered all the arguments advanced on behalf of both the parties. We have further looked into the case law relied upon by both the parties. In our opinion there is no supporting evidence to confirm the additions except the statements of two partners recorded at the time of…

Smt. Sushmita Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed and the

ITA 15/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri N.S. Sainia.Y. : 2009-10 Smt. Sushmita Gupta, Vs. Acit, Cc-2, 100, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 003 (Pan: Aczpg1440P) (Appellant) (Respondent) A.Y. : 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-32(1), Vs. Sh. Rajiv Kumar Gupta, Room No. 323, 3Rd Floor, 100, Sunder Nagar, Ara Centre New Delhi – 110 003 Jhandewalan Extn., (Pan: Aczpg1440P) New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 132(4)

…under section 132(4) - Whether merely on basis of admission, assessee could be subjected to such addition, when despite retraction revenue could not furnish any corroborative evidence in support of . such admission - Held, no Deepchand& Co.v. ACIT, (1995) 51 TTJ 421, ITAT Bombay Bench “We have examined the facts of the case. We have considered all the arguments advanced on behalf of both the parties. We have further looked into the case law relied upon by both the parties. In our opinion there is no supporting evidence to confirm the additions except the statements of two partners recorded at the time of…