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.

M/S. Aerens Buildwell Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5075/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 154Section 234BSection 40

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] AERENS BUILDWELL LTD., Vs. ACIT, CC-18, C/O BGJC & ASSOCIATES, NEW DELHI RAJ TOWER, G-1, ALAKHNANDA COMMUNITY CENTRE, NEW DELHI – 110 019 (PAN: AACCA3045N) [Appellant] [RESPONDENT] Assessee by : Shri Vivek Bansal, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Goel, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-25, New Delhi dated 28.6.2016 relating to…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sharp Menthol India Ltd., Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3642/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesharp Mint Ltd. Vs Dcit (Formerly Known As Sharp Menthol Central Circle-22 India Ltd. & Thereafter As Sharp New Delhi Global Ltd.) 1St Floor, Sagar Entre, Plot No. 9, Gujranwalan Town New Delhi- 110009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Sharp Mint Ltd. Central Circle-22 1St Floor, Sagar Entre, New Delhi Plot No. 9, Gujranwalan Town New Delhi- 110009 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80H

…were found during search that does not amount to incriminating material so as to attract invocation of Section 153A of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the following case laws on merits: i. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 473(Del.) ii) Best Infrastructure India (P.) Ltd. 397 ITR 82(Del) iii) Aggarwal Entertainment P. Ltd. (2016) 72 Taxmann.com 340( Del. Tri.) iv) Ravneet Solutions P. Ltd. (2018) 93 Taxmann.com 59 (HN) 7. The Ld. DR submitted that as mentioned in Para 3 of assessment order, the assessee surrendered an amount of Rs.1,04,16,783/- u/s 132(4) for A.Y.2002-03 & Rs.6,80,35,942/- for A.Y.2003-04. The assessee filed…

Sharp Menthol India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3624/DEL/2008[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesharp Mint Ltd. Vs Dcit (Formerly Known As Sharp Menthol Central Circle-22 India Ltd. & Thereafter As Sharp New Delhi Global Ltd.) 1St Floor, Sagar Entre, Plot No. 9, Gujranwalan Town New Delhi- 110009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Sharp Mint Ltd. Central Circle-22 1St Floor, Sagar Entre, New Delhi Plot No. 9, Gujranwalan Town New Delhi- 110009 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80H

…were found during search that does not amount to incriminating material so as to attract invocation of Section 153A of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the following case laws on merits: i. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 473(Del.) ii) Best Infrastructure India (P.) Ltd. 397 ITR 82(Del) iii) Aggarwal Entertainment P. Ltd. (2016) 72 Taxmann.com 340( Del. Tri.) iv) Ravneet Solutions P. Ltd. (2018) 93 Taxmann.com 59 (HN) 7. The Ld. DR submitted that as mentioned in Para 3 of assessment order, the assessee surrendered an amount of Rs.1,04,16,783/- u/s 132(4) for A.Y.2002-03 & Rs.6,80,35,942/- for A.Y.2003-04. The assessee filed…

Sharp Menthol India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3623/DEL/2008[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesharp Mint Ltd. Vs Dcit (Formerly Known As Sharp Menthol Central Circle-22 India Ltd. & Thereafter As Sharp New Delhi Global Ltd.) 1St Floor, Sagar Entre, Plot No. 9, Gujranwalan Town New Delhi- 110009 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs Sharp Mint Ltd. Central Circle-22 1St Floor, Sagar Entre, New Delhi Plot No. 9, Gujranwalan Town New Delhi- 110009 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 80H

…were found during search that does not amount to incriminating material so as to attract invocation of Section 153A of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the following case laws on merits: i. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 473(Del.) ii) Best Infrastructure India (P.) Ltd. 397 ITR 82(Del) iii) Aggarwal Entertainment P. Ltd. (2016) 72 Taxmann.com 340( Del. Tri.) iv) Ravneet Solutions P. Ltd. (2018) 93 Taxmann.com 59 (HN) 7. The Ld. DR submitted that as mentioned in Para 3 of assessment order, the assessee surrendered an amount of Rs.1,04,16,783/- u/s 132(4) for A.Y.2002-03 & Rs.6,80,35,942/- for A.Y.2003-04. The assessee filed…

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

ITA 7532/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Versatile Datamatics (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Land, Bengali Market Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aabcv8793K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aakcs2341F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm9501A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal, Ca Department By : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2018 Per Bench: These Appeals Are By The Respective Assessees Challenging The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)- Xxvi, New Delhi ( For Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. Since Both The Assessees Are Group Companies & The Impugned Assessment Had Arisen Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations Dated 28.3.2015 & Facts & Grounds Raised In This Appeal Are Similar, We Deem It Just & Convenient To Dispose Them Of By Way Of This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

…he Tribunal in the case of Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT vide ITA No.332/Del/2017 order dated 29.12.2017 for assessment year 2007-08, 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 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 15. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR…

Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

ITA 7531/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Versatile Datamatics (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Land, Bengali Market Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aabcv8793K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aakcs2341F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm9501A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal, Ca Department By : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2018 Per Bench: These Appeals Are By The Respective Assessees Challenging The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)- Xxvi, New Delhi ( For Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. Since Both The Assessees Are Group Companies & The Impugned Assessment Had Arisen Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations Dated 28.3.2015 & Facts & Grounds Raised In This Appeal Are Similar, We Deem It Just & Convenient To Dispose Them Of By Way Of This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

…he Tribunal in the case of Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT vide ITA No.332/Del/2017 order dated 29.12.2017 for assessment year 2007-08, 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 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 15. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR…

Versatile Datamicts (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 15, New Delhi

ITA 7530/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Versatile Datamatics (P) Ltd. Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Land, Bengali Market Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aabcv8793K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S Superior Calltech (P) Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aakcs2341F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2013-14 Metbrass Plassim India Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan : Aadcm9501A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. Shri Piyush Kumar Kamal, Ca Department By : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2018 Per Bench: These Appeals Are By The Respective Assessees Challenging The Separate Orders Of The Cit(A)- Xxvi, New Delhi ( For Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. Since Both The Assessees Are Group Companies & The Impugned Assessment Had Arisen Pursuant To The Search & Seizure Operations Dated 28.3.2015 & Facts & Grounds Raised In This Appeal Are Similar, We Deem It Just & Convenient To Dispose Them Of By Way Of This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 153A

…he Tribunal in the case of Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT vide ITA No.332/Del/2017 order dated 29.12.2017 for assessment year 2007-08, 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 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 15. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6592/DEL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…e, such material cannot be relied upon against the assessee. We are also guided by the judicial precedents as laid down in CIT v. Sunil Agarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 18 ITA no.6590-92/Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) and CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 82 (Del). Accordingly, the addition made on this account is deleted and the ground no 2 of the appeal is allowed. 10.0 In the result ITA No. 6590/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed. 11.0 We now take up appeals bearing ITA No. 6591/Del/2017 and ITA No. 6592/D/2017 for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015- 16 respectively. Ground Nos. 1 and 2…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6591/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…e, such material cannot be relied upon against the assessee. We are also guided by the judicial precedents as laid down in CIT v. Sunil Agarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 18 ITA no.6590-92/Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) and CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 82 (Del). Accordingly, the addition made on this account is deleted and the ground no 2 of the appeal is allowed. 10.0 In the result ITA No. 6590/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed. 11.0 We now take up appeals bearing ITA No. 6591/Del/2017 and ITA No. 6592/D/2017 for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015- 16 respectively. Ground Nos. 1 and 2…

Himanshu Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 28, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed

ITA 6590/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sri Gautam Jain & Piyush K. KamalFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjit Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153A

…e, such material cannot be relied upon against the assessee. We are also guided by the judicial precedents as laid down in CIT v. Sunil Agarwal 379 ITR 367 (Del) 18 ITA no.6590-92/Del/2017) (Himanshu Kohli) and CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. 397 ITR 82 (Del). Accordingly, the addition made on this account is deleted and the ground no 2 of the appeal is allowed. 10.0 In the result ITA No. 6590/Del/2017 filed by the assessee is allowed. 11.0 We now take up appeals bearing ITA No. 6591/Del/2017 and ITA No. 6592/D/2017 for assessment years 2014-15 and 2015- 16 respectively. Ground Nos. 1 and 2…

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

ITA 7567/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 Moon Beverages Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi.

For Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153A

…Tribunal in the case of Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT vide ITA No.332/Del/2017 order dated 29.12.2017 for assessment year 2007-08, 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 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 10. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573,…

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

ITA 7374/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 Moon Beverages Ltd., Acit, Central Circle- 15, 25, Bazar Lane, Bangali Market, New Delhi. Vs. New Delhi.

For Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133(6)Section 153A

…Tribunal in the case of Brahmaputra Finlease (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT vide ITA No.332/Del/2017 order dated 29.12.2017 for assessment year 2007-08, 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 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Harjeev Aggarwal reported in 290 CTR 263, he submitted that the statements recorded u/s 133(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 10. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573,…

ADIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Gobind Gulati, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5967/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Bhagwani, CA
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 54F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.5967/DEL/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-23, New v. Shri Gobind Gulati, Delhi. House No.16, Road No.19, East Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AALPG3453E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Amit Jain, Sr.D.R. Respondent by: Shri Ajay Bhagwani, CA Date of hearing: 01 03 2018 Date of pronouncement: 30 05 2018 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 1…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Puri Construction Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 754/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Puri Construction Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T W-82/A, Greater Kailash - Ii Circle - 18 New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacp2760 K

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan- CIT [DR]
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…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) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (c) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR (d) 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 had retracted the said statement by f…

M/S Puri Construction Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 995/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Puri Construction Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T W-82/A, Greater Kailash - Ii Circle - 18 New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacp2760 K

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan- CIT [DR]
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…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) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (c) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR (d) 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 had retracted the said statement by f…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Puri Construction Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1327/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Puri Construction Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T W-82/A, Greater Kailash - Ii Circle - 18 New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaacp2760 K

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Aparna Karan- CIT [DR]
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…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) CIT vs Ashwani Gupta. 322 ITR 396 (Del) (c) Andaman Timber Industries vs CCE (SC) reported in 127 DTR (d) 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 had retracted the said statement by f…

ACIT 19(2), Mumbai vs. Naozer B. Baldawala, Mumbai

ITA 233/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 72 & 73/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year’S: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Naozer Bejon Baldawala, Acit-19(2), Matru Mandir Buildtech India , 27 Kailash Building, Nana Chowk, Opp. बिधम/ Vs. Darshan, Kennedy Bridge, Bhatia Hospital, Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007 Mumbai-19, 400007 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aacpb7254K (अऩीराथी/Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri M M Golvala/Danshit NaikFor Respondent: Shri. V. Jenardhanan, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

…P a g e | 1 ITA Nos.72 &73/Mum/2017 & ITA Nos. 233 & 234/Mum/2017 Naozer Bejon Baldwala Vs. ACIT & ACIT Vs. Naozer Bejon Baldwala IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘K’ BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. Nos. 72 & 73/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year’s: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Naozer Bejon Baldawala, ACIT-19(2), Matru Mandir Buildtech India , 27 Kailash Building, Nana Chowk, Opp. बिधम/ Vs. Darshan, Kennedy Bridge, Bhatia Hospital, Tardeo Road, Nana Chowk, Mumbai-400007 Mumbai-19, 400007 स्थामीरेखासं./ जीआइआयसं./ PAN/GIR No. AACPB7254K (अऩीराथी/Appellant)…

M/S. Tinna Overseas Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 5389/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…t be acted upon. While placing reliance on the decisions reported in CIT vs. Sh Harjeev Aggarwal (Delhi High Court) 241 Taxmann 199, PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (Delhi High Court) 395 ITR 526 and PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) P. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 397 ITR 82, Ld. AR argued that a statement recorded u/s 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating course of search cannot be made. He also placed reliance on CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 357 ITR 146, CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metals Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 361 ITR 10, CIT vs. FCS Internatio…

M/S. Tinna Overseas Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 5388/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…t be acted upon. While placing reliance on the decisions reported in CIT vs. Sh Harjeev Aggarwal (Delhi High Court) 241 Taxmann 199, PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (Delhi High Court) 395 ITR 526 and PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) P. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 397 ITR 82, Ld. AR argued that a statement recorded u/s 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating course of search cannot be made. He also placed reliance on CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 357 ITR 146, CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metals Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 361 ITR 10, CIT vs. FCS Internatio…

M/S. Tinna Overseas Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 5387/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153C

…t be acted upon. While placing reliance on the decisions reported in CIT vs. Sh Harjeev Aggarwal (Delhi High Court) 241 Taxmann 199, PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (Delhi High Court) 395 ITR 526 and PCIT vs. Best Infrastructure (India) P. Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 397 ITR 82, Ld. AR argued that a statement recorded u/s 132(4) can form basis for a block assessment only if such statement relates to any incriminating course of search cannot be made. He also placed reliance on CIT vs. Fair Finvest Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 357 ITR 146, CIT vs. Gangeshwari Metals Ltd. (Delhi High Court) 361 ITR 10, CIT vs. FCS Internatio…