Dy.CIT v. Bhogilal Moolchand

96 ITD 344Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2005#6267 most cited
19

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 143(3)Section 131Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271(1)(C)Section 292CSection 68

Issues it is cited on

cash credit additionsection 153a proceedingsbogus share capitalretraction of statementprincipal officerstatement under section 132(4)retracted statementsection 292con-moneyaddition under section 68section 292section 29

Judgments citing Dy.CIT v. Bhogilal Moolchand

SHRI SUBHASH KUMAR AAHI,SATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-SATNA, SATNA

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 24/JAB/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur12 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Nikhil Choudhary

For Respondent: Shri N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR 1
Section 143(3)Section 250

…n three months of the statement recorded and therefore, the onus lay completely upon him to show that the statement had been made out of misconception. He referred to the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench of the ITAT in the case of ‘DCIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand’ 96 ITD 344, wherein the Bench had held that the statement given u/s. 132(4) of the Act was not conclusive and could be retracted, but the gap between the statement and the retraction was one of the important points to be taken into account to decide whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of fact or law and in the case of retraction being given…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. VEENA GUPTA, NEW DELHI

ITA 6474/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 153ASection 3

…herefore, statement under section 132(4) has a very high evidentiary value and it cannot be retracted without sound reasoning and corroborative evidence. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd) 108: (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…

MRS. VEENA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 6258/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 153ASection 3

…herefore, statement under section 132(4) has a very high evidentiary value and it cannot be retracted without sound reasoning and corroborative evidence. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd) 108: (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT. MADHU GUPTA, NEW DELHI

ITA 5547/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 153ASection 3

…herefore, statement under section 132(4) has a very high evidentiary value and it cannot be retracted without sound reasoning and corroborative evidence. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd) 108: (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…

MS. MADHU GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 5205/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 153ASection 3

…herefore, statement under section 132(4) has a very high evidentiary value and it cannot be retracted without sound reasoning and corroborative evidence. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd) 108: (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…

M/S. CLASSIC LAMPS INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3106/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 153ASection 3

…herefore, statement under section 132(4) has a very high evidentiary value and it cannot be retracted without sound reasoning and corroborative evidence. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd) 108: (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…

M/S. CLASSIC LAMPS INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3105/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 153ASection 3

…herefore, statement under section 132(4) has a very high evidentiary value and it cannot be retracted without sound reasoning and corroborative evidence. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd) 108: (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR vs. CHETANAYA PROMOTERS AND DEVLOPERS,, JABALPUR

In the result, on this ground, appeal of the Revenue as well as appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 133/JAB/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 292BSection 43C

…onths, the view finds support from the decision of Honourable ITAT "A" Bench, Banglore in the case of carpenters Classic (EXIM) Vs. DCIT reported in 108 TTJ 760 & Honourable ITAT "B" Bench, Ahemdabad in the case of DCIT Vs. Bogilal Mulchand Kondoi reported in 96 ITD 344. (iii) The assessee by admitting undisclosed income during the survey u/s 133A, induced the Income Tax authorities for not carrying any further enquiry. In such circumstances, ratio of decision in the ITAT "F" Bench, Mumbai in the case of ACIT Vs. Expresso Investment reported in 008 SOT 0287 is clearly applicable. 2. The CIT(A) has erred in law an…

SARITHA SHIVAYYAGARI ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(3) , HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 Smt. Saritha Shivayyagari Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad. Ward 11(3) Pan:Bkqps0479M Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/10/2022 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.10.2019 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 1, Hyderabad Relating To A.Y.2009-10. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) In Sustaining The Disallowance Of Rs.63,75,185/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. Ita 98/Hyd/2020

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…not alleged and proved, and assessee has not made retraction within three month of the statement recorded, onus lies with the assessee to prove that the declaration is made out of misconception as held by ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344. The decision held in the case of Carpenters Classics (Exim) (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT ( ITAT, Bang) 108 ITD 142 squarely applicable in the case. It is held that:- "When statement was made voluntary and was not alleged to have been obtained under threat or coercion, onus was on assessee to prove that said declaration was made under any misconception of fac…

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

ITA 391/RJT/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

ITA 390/RJT/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

ITA 389/RJT/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJIBHAI KHIMJIBHAI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2,, BHUJ

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

ITA 388/RJT/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 715/RJT/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 714/RJT/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 713/RJT/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

SHRI LALJI KHIMJI PATEL,,BHUJ vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRASL CIRCLE-II,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

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

ITA 712/RJT/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…tes the genuineness of the statement given at the time of search. No iota of evidence is given by the assessee in support of retraction. This view is well supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 (Ahd.). Thus, the statement cannot be said to be forcefully taken. ITA No.712/RJT/2010 & Others Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel Vs. ITO 11 4.9 In view of the above discussion, the contention of the appellant that the appellant was forcefully made to admit an amount of Rs. 80,69,186/- as unexplained expenditure on 11.10.2006 is baseless and no cog…

M.S, ULTIMATE BUILDERS,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT-2, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 134/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon'Ble Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year 2014-15 M/S. Ultimate Builders, Acit, Central-Ii, G-1, Kamdhenu Tower, E- Vs. Bhopal 2/22, Arera Colony, Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent ) Pan No.Aacfu8239M

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 17

…made retraction within three month of the statement recorded, onus lies with the assessee to prove that the declaration is made out of misconception. The assessee has not made such efforts. The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of DCIT v. Bhogilal Moolchand 96 ITD 344 held that statement given under section 13 2(4) is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when asses…

MOUNT ECHO BUILDWELL PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4908/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 132Section 132(4)

…ved that "where an assessee has made a statement of facts, he can have no grievance if the taxing authority taxes him in accordance with that statement" The learned Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bhogilal Moolchand (2005) 98 TTJ (And) 108 : (2005) 96 ITD 344 (Ahd) held that "statement given under section 132(4} is not conclusive and person can retract under certain circumstances. However, time gap between statement and retraction of statement is one of the important points to be taken into account to decide as to whether the statement was given under mistaken belief of either fact or law. However when…