Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi v. CIT

220 CTR 138High Court2008#10354 most cited

What is Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi v. CIT authority for?

A retracted statement under Section 132(4) cannot be the sole basis for making additions to income without corroborative evidence, especially when the assessee provides a more convincing explanation.

10

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

Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi v. CIT · 220 CTR 138 · section 132(4) · retracted statement · addition on admission · corroborative evidence · unexplained income · cash credits · search and seizure

Sections most often in play

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68Section 69CSection 132(4)Section 133(6)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 134surrender of incomeretracted statementsource of sourcecreditworthiness of the creditorstatement under section 132(4)disallowance of interest expenditureaddition under section 68advance taxentry operatorchief commissionersection 69c

Judgments citing Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3), Kolkata vs. Avima Exports Private Limited, Kolkata

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1599/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 131Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…naturally clear that the assessee had given proper explanation for all the items under which the issues on unsecured loans were brought by the AO to make the addition. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of 'Kailashben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs CIT reported in 220 CTR 138′, held that “In view of what has been stated hereinabove we are of the view that this explanation seems to be more convincing, has not been considered by the authorities below and additions were made and/or confirmed merely on the basis of statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act. Despite the fact that the said statement was later on re…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 4(3), Kolkata vs. Avima Exports Private Limited, Kolkata

Accordingly the ground No. 2 is dismissed by upholding the order of Ld

ITA 1439/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Central Circle 4(3) Avima Exports Private Limited 4Th Ns Road, Dalhousie, Kolkata, 110, Shantipally, Vs. Kolkata-700107, West Bengal Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aagca5857N Assessee By : Shri Manish Tiwari, Ar Revenue By : Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Raja Sengupta, DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68

…anath Gupta and Shri Vivek Gupta on 28.11.2019 & 26.12.2019 respectively. The Ld. CIT(A) further noted that the retracted statement cannot be relied to make the addition . The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Kedar Khan & Sons(2013) 352 ITR 480(SC).The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 (Del) to support her finding that the financial strength cannot be determined on the basis of parameters such as low income, lack of fixed assets in the balance sheet , turnover and rent payments etc. the Ld. CI…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Vivek Gupta, Kolkata

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1557/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 195Section 250Section 40Section 68

…in the assessment proceedings was retracted on 28.11.2019 by Vivek Gupta. The Ld. CIT(A) further noted that the retracted statement cannot be relied to make the addition. The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Kedar Khan & Sons (2013) 352 ITR 480(SC). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 (Del) to support her finding that the financial strength cannot be determined on the basis of parameters such as low income, lack of fixed assets in the balance sheet, turnover and rent payments. the Ld. CIT(A…

Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, 4(3), Kolkata vs. Privi Exports Private Limited, Kolkata

Accordingly the ground No. 2 is dismissed by upholding the order of Ld

ITA 1456/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 131Section 133ASection 250Section 68

…anath Gupta and Shri Vivek Gupta on 28.11.2019 & 26.12.2019 respectively. The Ld. CIT(A) further noted that the retracted statement cannot be relied to make the addition . The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision of Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 (Guj) and CIT Vs. Kedar Khan & Sons(2013) 352 ITR 480(SC). The Ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of CIT Vs. Ms. Mayawati 338 ITR 563 (Del) to support her finding that the financial strength cannot be determined on the basis of parameters such as low income, lack of fixed assets in the balance sheet , turnover and rent payments. the Ld. CIT(A…

Dy. CIT, Central Circle, Varanasi vs. Shri Ashok Agrawal, Varanasi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 23/VNS/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi21 Nov 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleshri Ashok Agrawal, Dy.Cit Central Circle, J-12/120, Dhoopchandi, Varanasi Jagatganj, Varanasi 221001

For Appellant: Shri V K Jindal & Sh Ashish JindalFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT
Section 132(4)

…hat he loses his normal mental state of mind and at that stage it cannot be expected from a person to pre-empt the statement required to be given in law as a part of his defense." 5.5.20 Further in the case of Kailash Ben Manharlal Chouksi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 1147 para 26 (Guj) held that "We are, therefore, of the view that merely on the basis of admission the assessee could not have been subjected to such additions unless and until, some corroborative evidence is found in support of such admission. We are also of the view that from the statement recorded at such odd hours cannot be considered to be a…

Ashok Kumar Agrawal, Varanasi vs. Dc/ACIT, CC, Varanasi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 52/VNS/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi21 Nov 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Bleshri Ashok Agrawal, Dy.Cit Central Circle, J-12/120, Dhoopchandi, Varanasi Jagatganj, Varanasi 221001

For Appellant: Shri V K Jindal & Sh Ashish JindalFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chaudhary, CIT
Section 132(4)

…hat he loses his normal mental state of mind and at that stage it cannot be expected from a person to pre-empt the statement required to be given in law as a part of his defense." 5.5.20 Further in the case of Kailash Ben Manharlal Chouksi Vs. CIT reported in 220 CTR 138 1147 para 26 (Guj) held that "We are, therefore, of the view that merely on the basis of admission the assessee could not have been subjected to such additions unless and until, some corroborative evidence is found in support of such admission. We are also of the view that from the statement recorded at such odd hours cannot be considered to be a…

DCIT, Central -2, Indore vs. M/S Great Galleon Ventures Ltd, Indore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

ITA 68/IND/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69ASection 69C

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A Nos. 114 to 116/Ind/2020 Assessment Years:2016-17 to 2018-19 M/s. Great Galleon Ventures ltd. DCIT, Central-2, Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.AABCK1743N ITA No.67 to 70/Ind/2021 Assessment Year:2015-16 to 2018-19 ACIT, Central-2, M/s. Great Galleon Ventures ltd. Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. AABCK1743N Revenue by Shri Rajeeb, Jain CIT-DR Respondent by S/ Shri A…

DCIT, Central -2, Indore vs. M/S Great Galleon Ventures Ltd, Indore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue bearing ITANo

ITA 67/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Borad

Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69ASection 69C

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A Nos. 114 to 116/Ind/2020 Assessment Years:2016-17 to 2018-19 M/s. Great Galleon Ventures ltd. DCIT, Central-2, Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Respondent ) Vs. P.A. No.AABCK1743N ITA No.67 to 70/Ind/2021 Assessment Year:2015-16 to 2018-19 ACIT, Central-2, M/s. Great Galleon Ventures ltd. Indore Indore बनाम/ Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No. AABCK1743N Revenue by Shri Rajeeb, Jain CIT-DR Respondent by S/ Shri A…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.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) Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Department by : Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER H.S.…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.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) Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Department by : Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER H.S.…

Kalasben Mangarlal Chokshi v. CIT (220 CTR 138) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax