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.

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Kag India Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 323/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.322/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.323/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.324/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2017-18 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.325/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.321/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2019-20 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.632/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2021-22

For Appellant: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144ASection 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यागयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा ,लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.322/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.323/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.324/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2017-18 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.325/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.321/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2019-20 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.632/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2021-22 v. Deputy Commissioner…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Kag India Private Limited, Chennai, Tamilnadu

ITA 322/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.322/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.323/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.324/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2017-18 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.325/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.321/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2019-20 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.632/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2021-22

For Appellant: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144ASection 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यागयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा ,लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.322/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.323/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.324/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2017-18 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.325/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.321/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2019-20 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.632/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2021-22 v. Deputy Commissioner…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Kag India Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 321/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.322/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.323/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.324/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2017-18 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.325/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.321/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2019-20 आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.632/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2021-22

For Appellant: Mr.Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144ASection 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यागयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा ,लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.322/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.323/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2015-16 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.324/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2017-18 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.325/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2018-19 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.321/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2019-20 आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.632/Chny/2025, A.Y.: 2021-22 v. Deputy Commissioner…

ACIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Bratpal Singh Tyagi, Hapur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 4359/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

…ecorded...." 20. 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, as has been held by hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held as under: “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).” 21. It is submitted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shri Sanjay Chhabra in Income Tax App…

Brat Pal Singh Tragi Through Legal Heir Smt. Suman Lata, Hapur vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 4132/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

…ecorded...." 20. 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, as has been held by hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held as under: “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).” 21. It is submitted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shri Sanjay Chhabra in Income Tax App…

Brat Pal Singh Tyagi, Hapur vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA

ITA 3348/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR

…ecorded...." 20. 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, as has been held by hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Best Infrastructure (84 Taxmann.com 287) when it was held as under: “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).” 21. It is submitted that Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of PCIT vs Shri Sanjay Chhabra in Income Tax App…

Vijetha Donthiri, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1355/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1355/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Vijetha Donthiri, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Pan:Alqpd4873P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/ 05/08/2025 Date Of Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/ 20/08/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Vijetha Donthiri (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 29.11.2024 For The A.Y. 2019-20. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एवं श्री मिुसूदन सावडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1355/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20) Vijetha Donthiri, Asst. Commissioner of Income Vs. Hyderabad. Tax, Central Circle 2(4), PAN:ALQPD4873P Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/ 05/08/2025 Da…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Income Tax Office vs. Supreme Polymers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the results the appeal of the

ITA 189/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 189/JP/2025 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16 cuke DCIT, Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central Circle-03, 137-138, Industrial Area, Jaipur Jhotwara, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Re…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. No 1 Auto Finance, Karur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 658/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:656 To 658/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.1 Auto Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aahfn 3793 J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:622 & 633/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Help Line Motor Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaffh 3971 E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.R.Venkata Raman, Ca & Shri.R.S.Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

…in AY 2012-13 in respect of transactions which, even as per the sworn statement relied upon, pertained to AY 2011-12. In this context, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Del), to submit that the uncorroborated statement of Shri Kathriesan, in the absence of any supporting evidence, cannot constitute incriminating material for the purposes of making an addition under the provisions of the Act. 16.19 Accordingly, the Ld. AR argued that there was no tangible or credible incriminating material available before the A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. No 1 Auto Finance, Karur

ITA 657/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

…in AY 2012-13 in respect of transactions which, even as per the sworn statement relied upon, pertained to AY 2011-12. In this context, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Del), to submit that the uncorroborated statement of Shri Kathriesan, in the absence of any supporting evidence, cannot constitute incriminating material for the purposes of making an addition under the provisions of the Act. 16.19 Accordingly, the Ld. AR argued that there was no tangible or credible incriminating material available before the AO…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. No 1 Auto Finance, Karur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 656/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:656 To 658/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.1 Auto Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aahfn 3793 J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:622 & 633/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Help Line Motor Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaffh 3971 E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.R.Venkata Raman, Ca & Shri.R.S.Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

…in AY 2012-13 in respect of transactions which, even as per the sworn statement relied upon, pertained to AY 2011-12. In this context, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Del), to submit that the uncorroborated statement of Shri Kathriesan, in the absence of any supporting evidence, cannot constitute incriminating material for the purposes of making an addition under the provisions of the Act. 16.19 Accordingly, the Ld. AR argued that there was no tangible or credible incriminating material available before the A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. Help Line Motor Finance, Karur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 633/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:656 To 658/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.1 Auto Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aahfn 3793 J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:622 & 633/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Help Line Motor Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaffh 3971 E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.R.Venkata Raman, Ca & Shri.R.S.Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

…in AY 2012-13 in respect of transactions which, even as per the sworn statement relied upon, pertained to AY 2011-12. In this context, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Del), to submit that the uncorroborated statement of Shri Kathriesan, in the absence of any supporting evidence, cannot constitute incriminating material for the purposes of making an addition under the provisions of the Act. 16.19 Accordingly, the Ld. AR argued that there was no tangible or credible incriminating material available before the A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. Help Line Motor Finance, Karur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 622/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:656 To 658/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.1 Auto Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aahfn 3793 J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:622 & 633/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Help Line Motor Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaffh 3971 E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.R.Venkata Raman, Ca & Shri.R.S.Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

…in AY 2012-13 in respect of transactions which, even as per the sworn statement relied upon, pertained to AY 2011-12. In this context, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 82 (Del), to submit that the uncorroborated statement of Shri Kathriesan, in the absence of any supporting evidence, cannot constitute incriminating material for the purposes of making an addition under the provisions of the Act. 16.19 Accordingly, the Ld. AR argued that there was no tangible or credible incriminating material available before the A…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 1, Bengaluru vs. Global Tech Park Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly

ITA 2363/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…aterial. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 48 Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-ta…

M/S. Global Tech Park Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2320/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…material. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 48 Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-tax…

M/S. Global Tech Park Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

ITA 2319/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…t u/s.132(4) also cannot be said to be incriminating material. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-tax…

M/S. Global Tech Park Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2318/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…material. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 48 Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-tax…

M/S. Global Tech Park Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2317/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…material. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 48 Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-tax…

M/S. Global Tech Park Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

In the result appeal no 2319/ Bang/2024 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2316/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…material. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure ITA Nos.2315 to 2320 & 2363/Bang/2024 Page 8 of 48 Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-tax…

M/S. Global Tech Park Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Bengaluru

ITA 2315/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 40aSection 69

…t u/s.132(4) also cannot be said to be incriminating material. This is also because of the reason that no person can incriminate himself by making a statement against himself. Honourable Delhi High court in case of PCIT V Best Infrastructure Private limited [ 397 ITR 82 ] (Delhi) PCIT vs Best Infrastructure (India) (P) Ltd [TS-5668-HC-2017(Delhi)-O] where the question was. Whether having regard to the materials seized in the course of search under section 132 and the statements made on behalf of the assessee, additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 153A, were not justified as held by the Income-tax…