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.

Lsl Tools (P) Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, CC-1, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5644/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…on statements recorded during search u/s 132(4) and post-search enquiries." 14. On an overall conspectus of the above the Tribunal has ultimately found that the addition which rested solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) would not sustain." iii) 397 ITR 82 (Del) dated 25.05.2017 Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. (extracted at pages 268-269 of Paper Book) iv) 432 ITR 384 (Del) PC IT vsAnand Kumar Jain (HUF) (extracted at pages 269-271 of Paper Book) v) 451 ITR 364 (Del) dated 28.07.2022 Pr. CIT vs. Ms. Suman Agarwal (extracted at pages 271-272 of Paper Book) vi) 457 ITR 1122 (Del) PCIT…

Lsl Tools (P) Ltd, Gurugram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 5643/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153DSection 234CSection 40A(2)(b)

…on statements recorded during search u/s 132(4) and post-search enquiries." 14. On an overall conspectus of the above the Tribunal has ultimately found that the addition which rested solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) would not sustain." iii) 397 ITR 82 (Del) dated 25.05.2017 Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd. (extracted at pages 268-269 of Paper Book) iv) 432 ITR 384 (Del) PC IT vsAnand Kumar Jain (HUF) (extracted at pages 269-271 of Paper Book) v) 451 ITR 364 (Del) dated 28.07.2022 Pr. CIT vs. Ms. Suman Agarwal (extracted at pages 271-272 of Paper Book) vi) 457 ITR 1122 (Del) PCIT…

Anoop Jain HUF, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle - 1, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4043/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ITA No.4038/Del/2018 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida PAN-AAMPJ9586C APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida PAN-AADPJ2136K APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain HUF vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Mark…

Anoop Jain, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle - 1, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4042/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ITA No.4038/Del/2018 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida PAN-AAMPJ9586C APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida PAN-AADPJ2136K APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain HUF vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Mark…

Ritu Jain, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), CC - 1, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4038/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…ITA No.4038/Del/2018 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida PAN-AAMPJ9586C APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida PAN-AADPJ2136K APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain HUF vs JCIT (OSD) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Mark…

Hiteshi Leasing and Housing Pvt Ltd, New Delho vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Faridabad

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

ITA 4620/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarhiteshi Leasing & Housing Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 1, Yogi Associates, Faridabad. E – 335, East Of Kailash, New Delhi – 110 005. (Pan : Aaach8298J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pushpdeep Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Order : 15.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Gurgaon-3 [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 04.081.2024 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “(A) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Assessing Officer & Cit(A), While Passing The Order Erred In: A. Passing The Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2015 U/S 153A Despite The Fact The Assessee Was Not Searched & The Assessee Was Issued Notice Under Section 153C On 29.1 1.2013. This Is A Jurisdictional Error

For Appellant: Shri Pushpdeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 131Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…l E System Pvt. Ltd. Besides, none of the statements of Sh. Sushen Mohan Gupta was provided to the assessee company during the course of assessment proceedings before utilizing the same against it. Otherwise too, in Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 82 (Delhi HC), Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that Statements recorded under section 132(4) do not by themselves constitute incriminating material. 19. It can next be observed from the assessment order that the assessee’s submission that seized material as Annexure A-29 are not of incriminating nature and there was no evidence of any cash given fo…

Jayaram Reddy Boopesh Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 711/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.705-711/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020 -21 & 2021-22. Shri Jayarama Reddy Boopesh Reddy, Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.61, Bren Balavana, 5th A Block, Income Tax, Koramangala, Central Circle – 2(4), Bangalore – 560 095. Bangalore. PAN – AGAPB 1359 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Bharat, CA Revenue by : Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 07.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.10.2025…

Jayarama Reddy Boopesh Reddy, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Bengaluru

ITA 706/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.705-711/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19, 2020 -21 & 2021-22. Shri Jayarama Reddy Boopesh Reddy, No.61, Bren Balavana, 5th A Block, Koramangala, Bangalore - 560 095. Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2(4), Bangalore. PAN – AGAPB 1359 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Bharat, CA Revenue by : Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 07.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.10.2025 ORD…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 754/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandran and Shri Ankur PaiFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) . ITA No.748 - 754/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 14 • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the asse…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 753/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandran and Shri Ankur PaiFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) . ITA No.748 - 754/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 14 • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the asse…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 752/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandran and Shri Ankur PaiFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) . ITA No.748 - 754/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 14 • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the asse…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeal of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 751/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…ed reliance on: • CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P) Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the assess…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 750/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandran and Shri Ankur PaiFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) . ITA No.748 - 754/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 14 • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the asse…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalaore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 749/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandran and Shri Ankur PaiFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) . ITA No.748 - 754/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 14 • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the asse…

Gopal Shashidhara, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 748/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri B.S Balachandran and Shri Ankur PaiFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Section 131Section 132ASection 153A

…Ltd (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.) • CIT v. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.) . ITA No.748 - 754/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 14 • PCIT v. Golden Goenka Fincorp Ltd (2023) 148 taxmann.com 313 (Calcutta) • Pr. CIT v. Best Infrastructure (P) Ltd (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Delhi) • PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC) 7. It was stressed that Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell (SC) has settled the law that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessments unless incriminating material is found. The learned DR, in reply, submitted that the cash seizure and the asse…

DCIT, CC-18, Jhandewalan Extn vs. Sant Lal Aggarwal, Jhajjar

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 903/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahaya.Y. 2010-11 [U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271D) A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271E) A.Y. 2011-12[(U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271E] A.Y. 2012-13 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2012-13 (U/S 271E] A.Y. 2013-14 [U/S 143(3)/147]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271DSection 271E

…boration done by learned AO and further, no cross examination provided by learned AO with regards to statements relied in the order of assessment. Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pet. Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 is also relied, as was also relied by learned CIT (A). 6.1 On second issue (Departmental Ground No. 3) assessee’s counsel’s arguments are as under: 5 ITA Nos. 2410 to 2415/Del/22 & ITA Nos. 771, 772 & 903/Del/2024 Sant Lal Aggarwal iii) With regards to addition on protective basis of a sum of Rs. 1, 28, 42, 239/-, it was submitted that the sol…

DCIT, Jhandewalan vs. Sant Lal Aggarwal, Bahadurgarh

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 772/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahaya.Y. 2010-11 [U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271D) A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271E) A.Y. 2011-12[(U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271E] A.Y. 2012-13 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2012-13 (U/S 271E] A.Y. 2013-14 [U/S 143(3)/147]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271DSection 271E

…boration done by learned AO and further, no cross examination provided by learned AO with regards to statements relied in the order of assessment. Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pet. Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 is also relied, as was also relied by learned CIT (A). 6.1 On second issue (Departmental Ground No. 3) assessee’s counsel’s arguments are as under: 5 ITA Nos. 2410 to 2415/Del/22 & ITA Nos. 771, 772 & 903/Del/2024 Sant Lal Aggarwal iii) With regards to addition on protective basis of a sum of Rs. 1, 28, 42, 239/-, it was submitted that the sol…

DCIT, Jhandewalan vs. Sant Lal Aggarwal, Bahadurgarh

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 771/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahaya.Y. 2010-11 [U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271D) A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271E) A.Y. 2011-12[(U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271E] A.Y. 2012-13 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2012-13 (U/S 271E] A.Y. 2013-14 [U/S 143(3)/147]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271DSection 271E

…boration done by learned AO and further, no cross examination provided by learned AO with regards to statements relied in the order of assessment. Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pet. Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 is also relied, as was also relied by learned CIT (A). 6.1 On second issue (Departmental Ground No. 3) assessee’s counsel’s arguments are as under: 5 ITA Nos. 2410 to 2415/Del/22 & ITA Nos. 771, 772 & 903/Del/2024 Sant Lal Aggarwal iii) With regards to addition on protective basis of a sum of Rs. 1, 28, 42, 239/-, it was submitted that the sol…

DCIT- CC -18, New Delhi vs. Sant Lal Aggarwal, Jhajjar

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2415/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahaya.Y. 2010-11 [U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271D) A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271E) A.Y. 2011-12[(U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271E] A.Y. 2012-13 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2012-13 (U/S 271E] A.Y. 2013-14 [U/S 143(3)/147]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271DSection 271E

…boration done by learned AO and further, no cross examination provided by learned AO with regards to statements relied in the order of assessment. Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pet. Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 is also relied, as was also relied by learned CIT (A). 6.1 On second issue (Departmental Ground No. 3) assessee’s counsel’s arguments are as under: 5 ITA Nos. 2410 to 2415/Del/22 & ITA Nos. 771, 772 & 903/Del/2024 Sant Lal Aggarwal iii) With regards to addition on protective basis of a sum of Rs. 1, 28, 42, 239/-, it was submitted that the sol…

DCIT, CC -18, New Delhi vs. Sant Lal Aggarwal, Jhajar

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2414/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahaya.Y. 2010-11 [U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271D) A.Y. 2010-11 (U/S 271E) A.Y. 2011-12[(U/S 143(3)/147] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2011-12 [U/S 271E] A.Y. 2012-13 [U/S 271D] A.Y. 2012-13 (U/S 271E] A.Y. 2013-14 [U/S 143(3)/147]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271DSection 271E

…boration done by learned AO and further, no cross examination provided by learned AO with regards to statements relied in the order of assessment. Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) Pet. Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 82 is also relied, as was also relied by learned CIT (A). 6.1 On second issue (Departmental Ground No. 3) assessee’s counsel’s arguments are as under: 5 ITA Nos. 2410 to 2415/Del/22 & ITA Nos. 771, 772 & 903/Del/2024 Sant Lal Aggarwal iii) With regards to addition on protective basis of a sum of Rs. 1, 28, 42, 239/-, it was submitted that the sol…