Dr. Vijay Pahwa v. DCIT

250 ITR 354High Court2001#12813 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 131(1A)Section 133ASection 250Section 234Section 28Section 65BSection 133A(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 65bsection 65section 131(1a)dumb documentson-moneysection 28section 115bbsection 133section 133asection 115bsection 131section 115bbe

Judgments citing Dr. Vijay Pahwa v. DCIT

SOUNDRA RAJAN ARUNA DIVYA,TIRUNELVELI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3215/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ashwin Gowda, JCIT
Section 115Section 127Section 131Section 133ASection 133A(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69Section 69A

…e not valid and which will not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to make any additions based on the invalid statement recorded under section 131(1A) of the Act. As held by the Hon. Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354, it can be seen that unless the provisions of section 133A[6] of the Act were satisfied, no statement could have been recorded invoking the powers of section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Much less, in the instant case, the statement recorded by the Survey team is invalid since there was no :- 8 -: reason to suspect that any income has been conceale…

FOUNDATION ONE INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3152/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3148 To 3152/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2017-18 Foundation One Infrastructures Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax, 4/3, G.D.Street, Race Course, Central Circle-1 Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. Pan: Aabcf-1701-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate & Mr.A.Suraj Nahar, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, (All Dated 30.09.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2013-14 To 2017-18. 2. There Is A Delay Of 11 Days In Filing These Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Ita Nos. 3148 To 3152//Chny/2024 Affidavit Stating Therein The Reasons For Belated Filing Of These Appeals. The Reasons Stated In The Condonation Application For Belated Filing Of These Appeals Is That Managing Director Of The Assessee Was Stranded Amidst Heavy Rains Caused By Cyclone Fengal At Puducherry During The Relevant Period & Hence, There Was Delay Of 11 Days.

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 250Section 28

…e not valid and which will not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to make any additions based on the invalid statement recorded under section 131[1A) of the Act. As held by the Hon. Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354, it can be seen that unless the provisions of section 133A[6] of the Act were satisfied, ITA Nos. 3148 to 3152//CHNY/2024 no statement could have been recorded invoking the powers of section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Much less, in the instant case, the statement recorded by the survey team is invalid since there was no reason to suspect that any…

FOUNDATION ONE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3151/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3148 To 3152/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2017-18 Foundation One Infrastructures Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax, 4/3, G.D.Street, Race Course, Central Circle-1 Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. Pan: Aabcf-1701-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate & Mr.A.Suraj Nahar, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, (All Dated 30.09.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2013-14 To 2017-18. 2. There Is A Delay Of 11 Days In Filing These Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Ita Nos. 3148 To 3152//Chny/2024 Affidavit Stating Therein The Reasons For Belated Filing Of These Appeals. The Reasons Stated In The Condonation Application For Belated Filing Of These Appeals Is That Managing Director Of The Assessee Was Stranded Amidst Heavy Rains Caused By Cyclone Fengal At Puducherry During The Relevant Period & Hence, There Was Delay Of 11 Days.

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 250Section 28

…e not valid and which will not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to make any additions based on the invalid statement recorded under section 131[1A) of the Act. As held by the Hon. Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354, it can be seen that unless the provisions of section 133A[6] of the Act were satisfied, ITA Nos. 3148 to 3152//CHNY/2024 no statement could have been recorded invoking the powers of section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Much less, in the instant case, the statement recorded by the survey team is invalid since there was no reason to suspect that any…

FOUNDATION ONE INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3150/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3148 To 3152/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2017-18 Foundation One Infrastructures Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax, 4/3, G.D.Street, Race Course, Central Circle-1 Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. Pan: Aabcf-1701-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate & Mr.A.Suraj Nahar, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, (All Dated 30.09.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2013-14 To 2017-18. 2. There Is A Delay Of 11 Days In Filing These Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Ita Nos. 3148 To 3152//Chny/2024 Affidavit Stating Therein The Reasons For Belated Filing Of These Appeals. The Reasons Stated In The Condonation Application For Belated Filing Of These Appeals Is That Managing Director Of The Assessee Was Stranded Amidst Heavy Rains Caused By Cyclone Fengal At Puducherry During The Relevant Period & Hence, There Was Delay Of 11 Days.

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 250Section 28

…e not valid and which will not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to make any additions based on the invalid statement recorded under section 131[1A) of the Act. As held by the Hon. Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354, it can be seen that unless the provisions of section 133A[6] of the Act were satisfied, ITA Nos. 3148 to 3152//CHNY/2024 no statement could have been recorded invoking the powers of section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Much less, in the instant case, the statement recorded by the survey team is invalid since there was no reason to suspect that any…

FOUNDATION ONE INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3149/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3148 To 3152/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2017-18 Foundation One Infrastructures Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax, 4/3, G.D.Street, Race Course, Central Circle-1 Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. Pan: Aabcf-1701-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate & Mr.A.Suraj Nahar, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, (All Dated 30.09.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2013-14 To 2017-18. 2. There Is A Delay Of 11 Days In Filing These Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Ita Nos. 3148 To 3152//Chny/2024 Affidavit Stating Therein The Reasons For Belated Filing Of These Appeals. The Reasons Stated In The Condonation Application For Belated Filing Of These Appeals Is That Managing Director Of The Assessee Was Stranded Amidst Heavy Rains Caused By Cyclone Fengal At Puducherry During The Relevant Period & Hence, There Was Delay Of 11 Days.

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 250Section 28

…e not valid and which will not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to make any additions based on the invalid statement recorded under section 131[1A) of the Act. As held by the Hon. Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354, it can be seen that unless the provisions of section 133A[6] of the Act were satisfied, ITA Nos. 3148 to 3152//CHNY/2024 no statement could have been recorded invoking the powers of section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Much less, in the instant case, the statement recorded by the survey team is invalid since there was no reason to suspect that any…

FOUNDATION ONE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, COIMBATORE

In the result the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3148/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3148 To 3152/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2017-18 Foundation One Infrastructures Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Vs. Income Tax, 4/3, G.D.Street, Race Course, Central Circle-1 Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. Pan: Aabcf-1701-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate & Mr.A.Suraj Nahar, C.A ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per George George K: These Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, (All Dated 30.09.2024) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2013-14 To 2017-18. 2. There Is A Delay Of 11 Days In Filing These Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Along With Ita Nos. 3148 To 3152//Chny/2024 Affidavit Stating Therein The Reasons For Belated Filing Of These Appeals. The Reasons Stated In The Condonation Application For Belated Filing Of These Appeals Is That Managing Director Of The Assessee Was Stranded Amidst Heavy Rains Caused By Cyclone Fengal At Puducherry During The Relevant Period & Hence, There Was Delay Of 11 Days.

For Appellant: Mr. T.Banusekar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 250Section 28

…e not valid and which will not give jurisdiction to the assessing officer to make any additions based on the invalid statement recorded under section 131[1A) of the Act. As held by the Hon. Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354, it can be seen that unless the provisions of section 133A[6] of the Act were satisfied, ITA Nos. 3148 to 3152//CHNY/2024 no statement could have been recorded invoking the powers of section 131 of the Income Tax Act. Much less, in the instant case, the statement recorded by the survey team is invalid since there was no reason to suspect that any…

SHRI SHRIRAM TOSHNIWAL,BURHANPUR vs. ACIT, KHANDWA

In the result appeal the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2014-15 Shri Shriram Toshniwal, Asstt. Commissioner Of Prop. M/S. Gayatri Vs. Income Tax, Enterprises, Udyog Nagar, Khandwa Burhanpur (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan Abxpt0602K Revenue By Shri K.C. Selvamani, Sr.Dr Assessee By Shri Maneesh Vaidya & Ms. Preeti Patwa, Cas Date Of Hearing 18.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 11.04.2019 O R D E R

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14A

…- 4) under Section 131 of the Act to the petitioner in excess of the jurisdiction vested in him. These notices are, consequently, liable to be quashed." 2.The Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa v. Samir Mukhopadhyay, Deputy CIT [2001] 250 ITR 354 considered the case where the survey was conducted on April 17, 1995, the summons under Section 131 (1) were served upon him on the spot and the same were executed within thirty minutes or so. The books and other documents, when produced before the authority in the Income Tax office, were impounded immediately. (copy at pages 04 to 05 of Case Law…

M/S KALPANA BIRI MFG. CO. PVT. LTD.,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIR- MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1020/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11 M/S Kalpana Biri Mfg. Co. Acit, Circle, बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., Vill. & P.O. Murshidabad, 39 R.N. V/S. Auragabad Dist. Tagore Road, P.O. Murshidabad, Berhampur, Pin. 742 101 Pin-742 201 [Pan No. Aabck 7051 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri S.L. Kochar, Advocate & अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-09-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 10-11-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxvi, Kolkata Dated 31.03.2014. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-Murshidabad U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 13.02.2013 For Assessment Year 2010-11. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Not Having Deleted The Addition To Income For Rs.30628425/- As Alleged Unexplained Investment U/S 69 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Account Of Alleged Suppression Of Value Of Stock.”

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 69

…3A of the Act. It is because, in the instant case the assessee neither refused nor evaded with the competent authority. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Dr. Vijay Pahwa vs. DCIT reported in 250 ITR 354 (Cal) wherein the relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced below:- “Summons can be served under section 131(1) only in case of obstruction by the person concerned or when some sort of hindrance is put up by him. In the instant case the summons was immediately executed on the same day within 30 minutes or so. There are other powers for searc…