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.

How many judgments cite PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd.?

786 judgments on BharatTax cite PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (397 ITR 82), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 132(4), Section 132, Section 147, Section 69A.

PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (397 ITR 82)

Shri Rajendra Agrawal, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue

ITA 1375/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 251(2)Section 271A

…ment recorded under section 132(4) does not by itself constitute incriminating material as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal, 290 CTR 263 (Delhi) as well as in case of Pr. CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd., 397 ITR 82 (Delhi). The ld. A/R has also referred to a series of decisions on the point that the penalty under section 271AAB cannot be imposed merely on the surrender made under section 132(4) in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search. He has referred to the various documents produced by the assessee before the AO and submitted t…

Smt. Jyoti Agarwal, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 1373/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271A

…nstitute incriminating material as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of 8 ITA Nos. 1373(4)-18/JP/2018 Smt. Jyoti Agrawal, Kota. CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal, 290 CTR 263 (Delhi) as well as in case of Pr. CIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd., 397 ITR 82 (Delhi). The ld. A/R has also referred to a series of decisions on the point that the penalty under section 271AAB cannot be imposed merely on the surrender made under section 132(4) in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search. He has referred to the various documents produced by the assessee before the AO and submitted t…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Smt. Malti Agarwal, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1447/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta(CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…Range Dehradun 96 ITD 406 (Delhi). (ii) Deep Chand Kothari V. CIT (1988) 171 ITR 381 (Raj (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (iv) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 82 The ld. AR has submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that statements recorded U/s 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. The ld AR has referred to the various documents produced before the Assessing Officer and submitted that once the assessee produced all documentary evidence to establish that the tr…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Smt. Indira Agrawal, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1444/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta(CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…Range Dehradun 96 ITD 406 (Delhi). (ii) Deep Chand Kothari V. CIT (1988) 171 ITR 381 (Raj (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (iv) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 82 The ld. AR has submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that statements recorded U/s 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. The ld AR has referred to the various documents produced before the Assessing Officer and submitted that once the assessee produced all documentary evidence to establish that the tr…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Shri Ajay Agarwal, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1442/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta(CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…Range Dehradun 96 ITD 406 (Delhi). (ii) Deep Chand Kothari V. CIT (1988) 171 ITR 381 (Raj (iii) Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal (2016) 290 CTR 263 (iv) Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Best Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 82 The ld. AR has submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that statements recorded U/s 132(4) of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. The ld AR has referred to the various documents produced before the Assessing Officer and submitted that once the assessee produced all documentary evidence to establish that the tr…