PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd.

397 ITR 82High Court2017#66 most cited

What is PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. authority for?

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not by itself constitute incriminating material for making additions to income.

786

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,636 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Best Infrastructure India · Section 132(4) · incriminating material · retracted statement · search assessment · addition without evidence · evidentiary value of statement · statement under search

Also reported as

84 Taxmann.com 2872017 SCC OnLine DEL 9591

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132(4)Section 132Section 147Section 69ASection 153CSection 148

Issues it is cited on

undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 158b(b)section 149(1)(c)section 158bb(1)section 4(2)section 158basection 153(a)section 158bbsection 201(3)statement under section 132(4)retracted statementsection 150

Judgments citing PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd.

DCIT, Circle- 1(1), Gurgaon vs. Dlf Universal Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and consequently, the cross objections filed by the assessee becomes infructuous

ITA 5963/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: 1. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learnedFor Respondent: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in observing that the proceeding
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 153Section 153A

…nd therefore, it does not get abated. It is settled principle of law that in terms of decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), Chintels India Ltd vs. DCIT, 397 ITR 416 (Del), PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Ltd., 397 ITR 82 (Del), PCIT Vs. Meeta Gutgutia, 395 ITR 526 (Del), Ld. PCIT vs. Ms Lata Jain, 384 ITR 543 (Del), the assessments and reassessments pending on the date of the search shall abate and the total income for such assessment years will have to be computed by the Assessing Officers as a fresh exercise; and that although Section 153A of the Act does not sa…

Space Chem Engineers Private Limited, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1791/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaasstt. Year 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC-1”: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asstt. Year 2008-09 Space Chem Engineers Vs. ITO, Ward -2(3) Private Limited, 206-207, Ghaziabad. Ansal Satyam RDC, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh 201 002 PAN AALCS8969E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate Shri Pushkar Pandey, Advocate Department by : Shri Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11/02/2021 Date of 18/03/2021 pronouncement O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 4th December, 20…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Late Smt. Bhawna Gupta (Through Legal Heir Sh. Sameer Gupta), Uttar Pradesh

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 517/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 153Section 153A

…ssessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2011-12 as well as order passed by the Jurisdictional High Court in case of Son of the assessee Sh. Sameer Gupta . The Ld. AR relied upon the following judgments:- " Principal CIT Vs. Best Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd. 397 ITR 82 " Principal CIT Vs. Baba Global Ltd. 2017 (2) TMI 346 " Principal CIT Vs. Dharam Pal Pem Chand Ltd. 2017 (8) TMI 958 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that in assessee’s case for Assessment Year 2011- 12 the Tribunal has deleted these very addition as per the search and seizure…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/31/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/29/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/28/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/26/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/27/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/23/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

PCIT (Central) - 3 vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF)

ITA/30/2021HC Delhi12 Feb 2021
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 260A

…w of the settled legal position, the first and foremost issue to be addressed is whether a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act would by itself be sufficient to assess the income, as 1 (2016) 380 ITR 573:2015 SCC OnLine Del 11554. 2 [2017] 397 ITR 82: 2017 SCC OnLine Del 9591. This case was challenged in the Supreme Court and SLP No. 13345/2018 was admitted. But subsequently, it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thus, the decision in Best Infrastructure (supra) has not been disturbed. 3 & 4 Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal, (2016) 290 CTR 263: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 1512. This case…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Puranmal Food India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 502/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year 2011-12 Acit Vs. Puranmal Food India Pvt. Ltd. Cent. Circle 3 R/O F-28, New Delhi Smalakha Bandh Road, Near Hotel Uppal Orchid New Delhi - 110 037 Pan Aafcp3180Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Co. No. 107/Del/2019 Asstt. Year 2011-12 Puranmal Food India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit R/O F-28, Cent. Circle 3 Smalakha Bandh Road, New Delhi Near Hotel Uppal Orchid New Delhi - 110 037 Pan Aafcp3180Q (Appellant) (Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153ASection 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year 2011-12 ACIT Vs. Puranmal Food India Pvt. Ltd. Cent. Circle 3 R/o F-28, New Delhi Smalakha Bandh Road, Near Hotel Uppal Orchid New Delhi - 110 037 PAN AAFCP3180Q (Appellant) (Respondent) CO. No. 107/Del/2019 Asstt. Year 2011-12 Puranmal Food India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT R/o F-28, Cent. Circle 3 Smalakha Bandh Road, New Delhi Near Hotel Uppal Orchid New Delhi - 110 037 PAN AAFCP3180Q (Appellant) (Respondent Department by: Smt. Sushma Si…

ACIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Utv Entertainment Television Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6784/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleacit – 16(1) V. M/S. Utv Entertainment Television Ltd., 1St Floor, Building No. 14 Room No. 439, Aayakar Bhavan Solitaire Corporate Park M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Guru Hargovind Marg, Chakala Andheri(E), Mumbai – 400 053 Pan: Aaccv4782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain Department By : M. Samatha

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar JainFor Respondent: M. Samatha
Section 194CSection 194HSection 194JSection 40Section 44ASection 9(1)(vi)

….Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act treating these payments as Royalty. 3 On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Mumbai Bench in the case of DCT v. Cox & Kings (I) Ltd & Anr [160 DTR 201] and Dish TV Indai Ltd v. ACIT [159 DTR 257] deleted the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. In these decisions the Coordinate Bench held that when there is a short deduction of TDS there cannot be any disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. Ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the decisions of the T…

Mirah Dekor Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC - 2(1), Mumbai

In the result we set aside the orders of authorities below and delete the addition

ITA 5318/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2020AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…sustainable. Reliance on: i) ITAT order in ITA No.2618/Mum/2018 in the case of Gammon Infrastructure Projects Ltd. vide order dated 06/02/2020 ii) 380 ITR 573 (Del.) CIT vs. Kabul Chawla iii) 374 ITR 645 (Bom.) CIT vs. Continental Warehouse Corporation iv) 397 ITR 82 (Del.) Pr. CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd. H) Addition made relying on statement of third party without affording opportunity to cross examine. Addition unsustainable. Reliance on Hon'ble Apex Court order in Civil Appeal No.4228 of 2006 in the case of M/s. Andaman Timber Industries.” 13. Per contra CIT-DR referred to the finding of…

ACIT, Central Circle-15, New Delhi vs. Sunstar Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 816/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Competent Infoways Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 128/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 124/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Hindustan Aqua Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 122/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Fortune Industrial Resources Ltd., Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 119/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Moon Beverages Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 115/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…

ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi vs. Hal Offshore Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the Cross Objections filed by the assessees are allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 111/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 154

…) of the Act in absence of any incriminating material as a result of search has no evidentiary value. For the above proposition, he relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd., reported in 397 ITR 82, copy of which is placed at pages 438 to 451 of the common paper book. Referring to the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd., vide ITA no.3332/Del/2017, order dated 29th December, 2017, for A.Y. 2007-08, a copy of which is placed at pages 465 to 484 of the paper book, he submitted that u…