How many judgments cite Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT?

266 judgments on BharatTax cite Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT (263 ITR 101), spanning 2010 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 133A, Section 143(3), Section 131, Section 132(4), Section 142(1), Section 147.

Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT

263 ITR 101High Court2003#308 most cited

What is Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT authority for?

A statement recorded under Section 133A of the Income-tax Act has no evidentiary value because Section 133A does not empower an Income-tax Officer to examine any person on oath.

266

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Paul Mathews & Sons · CIT · Section 133A · survey statement · evidentiary value · statement on oath · admission · Income-tax Officer power · Section 133A(3)(iii) · no oath power

Also reported as

129 Taxmann 41633 Taxmann.com 130

Sections most often in play

Section 133A Section 143(3)Section 131 Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 147 Section 143(2)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 133a(3)(iii)section 158bb survey under section 133a retracted statement statement under section 132(4)disallowance of interest expenditure section 133a loose papers section 132(4)section 132(4a)section 133 section 292c

Judgments citing Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji vs. M/S Mohit Ispat Ltd., Kundaim

Appeal of the Revenue is PARTLY ALLOWED in aforestated terms

ITA 9/PAN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Appellant V/S M/S Mohit Ispat Limited 339/340, Kundaim Industrial Estate, Goa-403115 Pan: Aaccm8154E . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Shriniwas Naik & Narchiva Lotlikar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 04/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Appeal Of The Revenue Instituted U/S 253(2) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Order Dt. 04/10/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Act By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-2, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Sprung From Order Of Assessment Dt. 30/12/2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By Acit, Central Circle, Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17.[‘Ay’]

For Appellant: Mr Shriniwas Naik & Narchiva Lotlikar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 132Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 253(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Years: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Appellant V/s M/s Mohit Ispat Limited 339/340, Kundaim Industrial Estate, Goa-403115 PAN: AACCM8154E . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee by: Mr Shriniwas Naik & Narchiva Lotlikar [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by: Mr Naveen Kumar [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 04/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 27/02/2026 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; This appeal of t…

Madan Mohan Rao Puvvada, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1152/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1152/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Madan Mohan Rao The Income Tax Puvvada, Hyderabad. Officer, Ward-5(1), Vs. Pin – 500 063. Hyderabad. Pan Agjpp4754H Telangana. Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 263

…ising the order of the Assessing Officer. In support of this, the assessee relies on the following case laws: a) CIT vs. Mehrotra Brothers [2004] 270 ITR 157 (MP); b) CIT vs. Parameshwar Bohra [2004] 267 ITR 698 (Raj); c) Paul Mathews and Sons vs. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 101 (Ker) Since the property under consideration has been reported in the books and ITR by joint holder and Asst order passed by the Assessing officer in case of the assessee was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, the proposed revision u/s 263 is requested to be dropped.” 10.4. In para 2.2 and 2.3 of the reply of the asses…

Shri Narayan Rao Hebri vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/166/2025HC Karnataka20 Feb 2026

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 260Section 260A

…- 1 - ITA No. 166 of 2025 Reserved on : 20.01.2026 Pronounced on : 20.02.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 166 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. SHRI NARAYAN RAO HEBRI, (PAN: AASPH2926A; S/O SHRI DHUMANNA, AGE ABOUT 71 YEARS) (RESIDING AT No.1, CHINNA, S. N. NAGAR MAIN ROAD, SAGAR 577204). …APPELLANT (BY SRI K.K. CHYTHANYA, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI TATA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIO…

Harsh Deep Burman, Nawada vs. Ac/Dc, Ac/Dc Circle Two

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 501/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vimlesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manab Adak, JCIT

Section 133Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69

…was made by family members and reflected in their ITRs and books. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying solely on the statement recorded u/s 133A, which has no evidentiary value without corroborative material, contrary to settled law (Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT [263 ITR 101 (Ker)], CIT v. M.P. Scrap Traders [2015] 60 taxmann.com 205 (Guj)). 4. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider CBDT Circulars No. 286/2/2003-IT(Inv.) dated 10.03.2003 and 286/98/2013-IT(Inv.II) dated 18.12.2014 prohibiting confessional statements under coercion. 5. The order passed by the authorities below is bad in law, contrary to facts, and violativ…

Naresh Arora, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Central Circle-31, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3144/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumararti Garg, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 31, A – 19, Guru Ram Dass Nagar, Delhi. Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. (Pan : Akupg4398A) Naresh Arora, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle 31, A-061, 6Th Floor, Spaze Privy, Delhi. Sector 72, Sohna Road, Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aacpa3657P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, Advocate Shri Vaibhav Srivastava, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 Date Of Order : 14.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 65BSection 69Section 69C

…(xi) Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC); (xii) CIT v. Anil Khandelwal [ITA Nos.247 & 248/2012 decided 21.04.2015]; (xiii) Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC); (xiv) Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker.); (xv) CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC); (xvi) Pushkar Narain Sarraj v. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 388 (All.); (xvii) P.R. Metrani v. CIT, Bangalore (2006) 157 taxman 325 (SC); (xviii) CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC); (xix) CIT v. Kanpur Coat Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC). 5. The same is rebutted by the D…

Arit Garg, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-31, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 3143/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Saubhagya Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 65BSection 69Section 69C

ACIT Central Circle 1(4) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 5779/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…on oath. Therefore, the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value and any admission made in such statement cannot be made the basis for admission. 36. We find the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Paul Mathews & Son vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Kar) has held that the provisions of section 133A of the Act does not empower any ITO to examine any person on oath and the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value. 37. We find the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P. Balasubramanian (2013) 354 ITR 116 (Mad) has held that the addition can be made on the bas…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4448/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…on oath. Therefore, the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value and any admission made in such statement cannot be made the basis for admission. 36. We find the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Paul Mathews & Son vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Kar) has held that the provisions of section 133A of the Act does not empower any ITO to examine any person on oath and the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value. 37. We find the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P. Balasubramanian (2013) 354 ITR 116 (Mad) has held that the addition can be made on the bas…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4445/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 4 Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Ms. Kalyanee Fortune Constructions, Mumbai

In the result, all the above appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 4444/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)

Section 131Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)

…on oath. Therefore, the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value and any admission made in such statement cannot be made the basis for admission. 36. We find the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Paul Mathews & Son vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Kar) has held that the provisions of section 133A of the Act does not empower any ITO to examine any person on oath and the statement recorded u/s 133A of the Act has no evidentiary value. 37. We find the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. P. Balasubramanian (2013) 354 ITR 116 (Mad) has held that the addition can be made on the bas…

Worldview Education Services Private Lmited, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-17(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1056/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1056/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Worldview Education Services Private Limited, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad – 500 016. Ward-17(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw9480F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca C. Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: G Saratha, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA C. Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: G Saratha, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…- HC); 7. D. Pedda Reddaiah vs. ITO, dated 30.04.2020 (ITAT, Hyd. Tribu); 8. CIT vs. M. Chandra Sekhar 151 ITR 433 (SC). 9. CIT vs. Mulchand Bagri (108 CTR 206 Cal.). 10. CIT vs. D P Karai (266 ITR 113 Guj); 9 ITA.No.1056/Hyd./2025 11. Paul Mathews vs. CIT (263 ITR 101 Ker); 12. Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [2000] 109 Taxman 66 (SC) 3.1. He has submitted that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court for the State of Telangana in the case of CIT vs. V. Dhana Reddy and Co. [2018] 407 ITR 96 (T & AP) has held that when the issue duly considered by the Assessing Officer, then, the Pr. CI…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Satara Circle, Satara vs. Kay Bouvet Engineering Limited, Satara

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the COs filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1392/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar &For Respondent: S/Shri Amol Khairnar CIT-DR and Manish M. Mehta

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

…m the aforesaid, it is apparent that while Section 132(4) of the Act specifically authorizes an officer to examine a person on oath, Section 133A does not permit the same. 13. The Kerala High Court in Paul Mathews & Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Kerala) and Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Kader Khan, (2008) 300 ITR 157 have also taken a similar view. The relevant portion of the Kerala High Court judgment in the case of Paul Mathews & Sons (supra) is reproduced hereinbelow :- "The provision also enables the income-tax authority to impound and retain in his custody for such period as he thin…

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Satara vs. Kay Bouvet Engineering Limited, Satara

ITA 1374/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar &

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 148

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 24/JAB/2019) (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Subhash Kumar Aahi, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Prop. of M/s Mahan Jewellers, Circle, Chowk Bazar, Satna (MP) 485001 Vs. Satna (MP)- 485001 PAN/GIR No. ACJPA 5355K (Applicant) : (Respondent) Applicant by : Shri Sanjay Nema Advocate And Shri Ashish Goyal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR 1 Date of Hearing : 15.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12.12.2025 O R D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, AM: This i…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND 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 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27(here…

Chokkanahalli Gundappa Chandrappa, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result both these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 311/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep C., A.RFor Respondent: Sri N. Balusamy, D.R

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 250

…ch examination can also be used in evidence under the income tax act. On the other hand, whatever statement recorded under section 133A of the act is not given an evidentiary value, I the decision of the Kerala High Court in Paul Matthews & Sons v. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker).” Thus, respectfully following the above decision we are of the opinion that during the course of survey the Officer can record the statement of a person under sub-section (3)(iii) of section 133A of the Act however, without any material evidence the statement given in survey proceeding cannot be made the sole basis for the addition of inco…

Chokkanahalli Gundappa Chandrappa, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

ITA 310/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep C., A.RFor Respondent: Sri N. Balusamy, D.R

Section 133ASection 250Section 37

…ch examination can also be used in evidence under the income tax act. On the other hand, whatever statement recorded under section 133A of the act is not given an evidentiary value, I the decision of the Kerala High Court in Paul Matthews & Sons v. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker)." Thus, respectfully following the above decision we are of the opinion that during the course of survey the Officer can record the statement of a person under sub-section (3)(iii) of section 133A of the Act however, without any material evidence the statement given in survey proceeding cannot be made the sole basis for the addition of inc…

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 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1557/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-2014) I.T.A. No.1558/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2014-2015) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata - 700107……..…...……………....Appellant vs. Vivek Gupta, 22, New Road, Alipore, Kolkata - 700027 [PAN: ADTPG3727C] ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Manish Tiwari, FCA Department represented by : S.B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR Date of concluding the h…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH,KOLKATA SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1456/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2017-2018) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata, 110, Shantipally, Kolkata - 700107……..…...……………....Appellant vs. Privi Exports Private Limited, Office No. 2, GF, 91A/1, Park Street, Kolkata - 700016 [PAN: AAICP6253B]................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Manish Tiwari, FCA Department represented by : Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR Date of concluding the hearing : 08.09.2…

Aapna Marble, G T Road Bhucho Kalan vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle II Bathinda

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

ITA 639/ASR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, C.A

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 250

…ion can be made under section 698 merely on the basis of statement during survey in respect of renovation of office show room if the statement has been retraced and there was no evidence of any expenditure found in the survey" Paul Mathew & Sons V CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101/129 Taxman 416 25 I.T.A. No. 639/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 "ITO having not accepted the income declared by the assessee after the survey in a mechanical way, but after applying his mind to various aspect of the mater including the disclosure made before completing the assessment, order passed by the AO cannot be said to be erroneous or…