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 367,518 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.

Sudhir Kumar.D.Shah - HUF, Hyderabad vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

ITA 1876/HYD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1871/Hyd/13 2002-03 1872/Hyd/13 2003-04 Deputy 1873/Hyd/13 2004-05 Shri Sudhir Kumar Commissioner of D.Shah– HUF, Income Tax, HYDERABAD Central Circle-2, 1874/Hyd/13 2005-06 [PAN: AAGHS6336H] HYDERABAD 1875/Hyd/13 2006-07 1876/Hyd/13 2007-08 1877/Hyd/13 2008-09 For Assessee : Shri K.C.Devdas, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21-10-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 25-10-2019 O R D E R PER BENCH…

Sudhir Kumar.D.Shah - HUF, Hyderabad vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

ITA 1875/HYD/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1871/Hyd/13 2002-03 1872/Hyd/13 2003-04 Deputy 1873/Hyd/13 2004-05 Shri Sudhir Kumar Commissioner of D.Shah– HUF, Income Tax, HYDERABAD Central Circle-2, 1874/Hyd/13 2005-06 [PAN: AAGHS6336H] HYDERABAD 1875/Hyd/13 2006-07 1876/Hyd/13 2007-08 1877/Hyd/13 2008-09 For Assessee : Shri K.C.Devdas, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21-10-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 25-10-2019 O R D E R PER BENCH…

Sudhir Kumar.D.Shah - HUF, Hyderabad vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

ITA 1874/HYD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1871/Hyd/13 2002-03 1872/Hyd/13 2003-04 Deputy 1873/Hyd/13 2004-05 Shri Sudhir Kumar Commissioner of D.Shah– HUF, Income Tax, HYDERABAD Central Circle-2, 1874/Hyd/13 2005-06 [PAN: AAGHS6336H] HYDERABAD 1875/Hyd/13 2006-07 1876/Hyd/13 2007-08 1877/Hyd/13 2008-09 For Assessee : Shri K.C.Devdas, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21-10-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 25-10-2019 O R D E R PER BENCH…

Sudhir Kumar.D.Shah - HUF, Hyderabad vs. Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2, Hyderabad

ITA 1873/HYD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. 1871/Hyd/13 2002-03 1872/Hyd/13 2003-04 Deputy 1873/Hyd/13 2004-05 Shri Sudhir Kumar Commissioner of D.Shah– HUF, Income Tax, HYDERABAD Central Circle-2, 1874/Hyd/13 2005-06 [PAN: AAGHS6336H] HYDERABAD 1875/Hyd/13 2006-07 1876/Hyd/13 2007-08 1877/Hyd/13 2008-09 For Assessee : Shri K.C.Devdas, AR For Revenue : Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21-10-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 25-10-2019 O R D E R PER BENCH…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Jk International, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue is dismissed with

ITA 716/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Oct 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar,, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta, (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 10ASection 115BSection 36(1)(va)Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 716, 717 & 718/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 20010-11 to 2012-13 cuke M/s. J.K. International The DCIT Central Circle-2 Vs. F-29, SEZ-II, Sitapura, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEFJ 5334 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta, (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Ass…

Mrs. Renu Sehgal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 708/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 837/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Acit Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 708 & 709 Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Cuke Mrs. Renu Sehgal The Dcit Vs. 227-278, Nemisagar Colony Central Circle-3, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta, Cit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2019 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm There Are Cross Appeals For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Directed Against The Order Dated 09-04-2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur. The 2 Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta, CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 51Section 68

…e by the assessee during search operation. Though the above principle is laid down in relation to assessment of block period u/s 158 BC of the act, the same was also applied in respect of assessment u/s 153A by Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held thus:- 38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal (supra). 7.4 In the present case there is no such statement admitting unexplained cash credit. Even statement u/s 132(4) refers…

Sajan Kumar Jain, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5949/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

Anand Kumar Jain, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4723/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

Satish Dev Jain, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5955/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

Anand Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5948/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

Anand Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5947/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

Anand Jain HUF, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5946/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

Anand Jain HUF, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5945/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…ial unearthed during the course of search”. 12. Similar view was expressed by their Lordships in the case of CIT Vs. RRJ Securities Ltd. – [2016] 380 ITR 612 (Delhi). 13. In the case of Principal CIT, Delhi-2 Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. – [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi), their Lordships of Jurisdictional High Court reiterated the similar view in paragraph 33 of the order, which reads as under :- “33. At this stage, it requires to be noticed that the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-III) v. Kabul Chawla (supra) took note inter alia of the decision of the Bombay High Court in C…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Inderjeet Gulati, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5870/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Kaushik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘D’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5870/Del./2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) ACIT, Central Circle 23, vs. Shri Inderjeet Gulati, New Delhi. House No.16, Road No.19, East Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. (PAN : AALPG3452F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Piyush Kaushik, Advocate Shri Ajay Bhagwani, FCA REVENUE BY : Shri J.K. Mishra, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 25.07.2019 Date of Order : 29.07.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Appellant, Central Circle 23, New Delhi (hereinaf…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 752/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishidcit, Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Central Circle-18, W-82A, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 153C

…even though specific request for the same was made by assessee – appellant vide letter dated 26.12.2008. Reliance is placed on following judgments in support of the aforesaid proposition: (a) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) reported in 397 ITR 82. (b) Kishinchand Chellaram vs. CIT. [1980] 125 ITR 713 (SC) (c) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) DCIT Vs. Florentine Estate Pvt. Ltd, (d) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR 241. 11.9 That further, it was submitted that even the statement of Sh. S.K. Gupta so relied on by the Revenue, cannot be relied on, as Sh. Gupta…

Lakshya Educational Trust, Ghaziabad vs. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Ghaziabad

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4128/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishilakshya Educational Trust, Vs. Addl. Cit, Range-1, Akhilesh Kumar, Adv., Chamber Ghaziabad No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad, Pan: Aatl6943M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Lakshya Educational Trust, Vs. Addl. CIT, Range-1, Akhilesh Kumar, Adv., Chamber Ghaziabad NO. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, RDC Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad, PAN: AATL6943M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv Revenue by: Smt Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01/04/2019 Date of pronouncement 04/06/2019 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee, Lakshya Educational Trust, AOP, through its trustee against the o…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S. Kedia Real Estate LLP, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

ITA 289/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…t to be based on the statement recorded….” Though the above principle is laid down in relation to assessment of block period u/s 158 BC of the Act, the same was also applied in respect of assessment u/s 153A by Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held thus: 39 ITA 128 & 127/JP/2019 & 285 & 289/JP/2019_ Nitin Kedia Vs DCIT with one Anr. 38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal (supra). Some of the more decisions laying dow…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 288/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…to be based on the statement recorded...." Though the above principle is laid down in relation to assessment of block period u/s 158 BC of the Act, the same was also applied in respect of assessment u/s 153A by Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held thus: 38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal (supra). Some more judgment on the issue are as under: Kailashben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs CIT (2008) 174 Taxmann 466 (Gun / (2008)…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 287/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…to be based on the statement recorded...." Though the above principle is laid down in relation to assessment of block period u/s 158 BC of the Act, the same was also applied in respect of assessment u/s 153A by Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held thus: 38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal (supra). Some more judgment on the issue are as under: Kailashben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs CIT (2008) 174 Taxmann 466 (Gun / (2008)…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nitin Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 286/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…to be based on the statement recorded...." Though the above principle is laid down in relation to assessment of block period u/s 158 BC of the Act, the same was also applied in respect of assessment u/s 153A by Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held thus: 38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Harjeev Aggarwal (supra). Some more judgment on the issue are as under: Kailashben Mangarlal Chokshi Vs CIT (2008) 174 Taxmann 466 (Gun / (2008)…