Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Deccan Jewellers Ltd.

438 ITR 131High Court2021#3482 most cited

What is Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. authority for?

Excess stock found during a survey or search, where the assessee explains it as a result of suppressed business profits over the years, is assessable as business income and not as an undisclosed investment under section 69. A possible view taken by the Assessing Officer cannot be a subject matter of revision under section 263.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2025.

Also referred to as

PCIT vs Deccan Jewellers Ltd. · excess stock · business income · undisclosed investment · section 69 · section 263 · revision · prejudicial to interest of revenue · survey · search

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 263Section 115BBESection 69BSection 153CSection 143(2)Section 41(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 40(b)set off of lossessection 71abatement of assessmentsection 69dsection 153a proceedingsprejudicial to interest of revenuepreponderance of probabilitysection 69bthird party informationsurvey under section 133asection 158bd

Judgments citing Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Deccan Jewellers Ltd.

Rajiv Kumar Goyal, Dhuri vs. DCIT, CC-2, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: This Hon’Ble Tribunal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 As Amended From Time To Time. 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dated 03/02/2023 In Appeal No. 10850/2018-19/It/Cit(A)-5/Ldh/2021-22 For A.Y. 2019-20 Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Which Was Dismissed. Therefore The Present Second Appeal Under Section 253 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Before Us Against The Aforesaid Order Dt. 03/02/2023 Which Is Hereiafter Referred To As The Impugned Order. Factual Matrix 3. The Assessee Had For The Relevant Year I.E; A.Y. 2019-20 Was Also Engaged In The Same Business I.E; Manufacturing Of Pvc Pipes & Had Filed

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishaba Marwaha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. D.R
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 250(6)Section 253

…resorted to taxing the income of the assessee at the rate of 60% in terms of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 10.18 The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) held that where the assessee was engaged in the business of Gold and Diamond jewellery and Silver articles and during the search and seizure operation u/s 132, excess stock was found to be declared and the assessee had submitted that excess stock was result of suppression of profit from business over the years and the same had not been kept…

M/S Jashan Finlease Ltd., Khanna vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 132/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 68Section 69

…resorted to taxing the income of the assessee at the rate of 60% in terms of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 10.18 The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) held that where the assessee was engaged in the business of Gold and Diamond jewellery and Silver articles and during the search and seizure operation u/s 132, excess stock was found to be declared and the assessee had submitted that excess stock was result of suppression of profit from business over the years and the same had not been kept…

Mrs. Kiran Bala, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-III, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 254/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 69Section 69ASection 69B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 254/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Mrs. Kiran Bala, The DCIT, बनाम Prop. M/s Brother Fashion, Central Circle-III, VS Bahadur Ke Road, Ludhiana. Bharti Colony Chowk, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: ABXPB2712J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR तार"ख/Da…

Sh. Gurinder Makkar, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-3, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 20/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 32Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 43(1)Section 68Section 69

…resorted to taxing the income of the assessee at the rate of 60% in terms of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 10.18 The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) held that where the assessee was engaged in the business of Gold and Diamond jewellery and Silver articles and during the search and seizure operation u/s 132, excess stock was found to be declared and the assessee had submitted that excess stock was result of suppression of profit from business over the years and the same had not been kept…

M/S A.P. Knit Fab, Ludhiana vs. DCIT CC-3, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 732/CHANDI/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Have Not Been Appreciated. 4. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That During The Course Of Survey, No Other Income Was Noticed By The Department And, As Such, Taxing The Amount Offered As Deemed Income, Is Against The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case. 5. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Also Failed To Appreciate That At The Time Of Survey, It Was Agreed That The Applicant Shall Pay The Taxes On The Amount Offered

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 69Section 69B

…resorted to taxing the income of the assessee at the rate of 60% in terms of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 10.18 The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) held that where the assessee was engaged in the business of Gold and Diamond jewellery and Silver articles and during the search and seizure operation u/s 132, excess stock was found to be declared and the assessee had submitted that excess stock was result of suppression of profit from business over the years and the same had not been kept…

M/S Veer Enterprises, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, CC-III, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 255/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 69Section 69ASection 69B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 255/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s Veer Enterprises, The DCIT, बनाम Bahadur Ke Road, Central Circle-III, VS Ludhiana East, Ludhiana. Central Post Office, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AAEFV6535D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tejmohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr.DR तार"ख/Date of H…

Sh. Krishan Kumar, Khanna vs. DCIT, CC-1, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 175/CHANDI/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.175/CHD/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2019-20 Shri Krishan Kumar, Vs. The DCIT, Prop., M/s Riwaz Jeweller, Central Circle-1, बनाम Karnail Singh Road, Ludhiana Subash Bazar, Khanna 141401 "थायीलेखासं./PAN No.AKRPK5188J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Anil Sharma, JCIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of H…

Shree Murlidhar Jewellers, Jamnagar vs. The Pr.CIT-IV, Jamnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RJT/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2016-17 Shree Murlidharjewellers Vs. The Pr.Cit-4 Chandi Bazar Jamnagar. Jamnagar 361 001. Pan : Aaifs 4781 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assesseeby : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/05/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/08/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income-Tax)-4, Jamnagar [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Pr.Cit)”] Dated 11.12.2019In Exercise Of His Revisionary Power Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act , 1961 ("The Act" For Short) Over The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Asst.Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: I) The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax - 4, Jamnagar Erred In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act, Particularly In The Light Of Reasons Stated By Him In The Show Cause Notice & In The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Act & Hence The Impugned Order Is Bad In Law. 2 Ii) The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax - 4, Jamnagar Erred In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Addition Of Rs. 70,89,098/- U/S 69 Of The Act By Failing To Appreciate That Provisions Of Section 69 Were Not Attracted In.”

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, ld.CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 69

…not declared to the deparment is receipt from business and not any investment as it cannot be co-related with any specific asset.” Further our attention was also drawn to the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Deccan Jeweller Ltd., 438 ITR 131 (AP) holding as under: “15. In the present cases, explanations have been offered by the assessees that excess stock was a result of suppression of profits from business over the years and is a part of the overall stock found. In ITTA Nos.9 & 14 of 2021, the assessees concerned gave further clarification that the excess stock had been admitted in…

Sh. Sanjay Gupta, Prop. M/S Hardik Jewellers, in Front of Arya Samaj Mandir, Bajaja Bazar, Alwar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Alwar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 292/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 154

…not sustainable.” 3. In various cases it has been held that the excess stock found is taxable as business income under the normal provisions of the Act. Reliance in this connection is placed on the following cases:- PCIT Vs. Deccan Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) (HC) (Case laws compilation PB 1-6) The head note of the decision reads as under:- Income from undisclosed sources—Vis-a-vis business income—Excess stock found during search—Explanations have been offered by the assessees that excess stock was a result of suppression of profits from business over the years and is a part of the overall stock…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Devender Rao Gorukanti, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 439/HYD/2022[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 May 2023AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 Acit,Cc-2(2) Vs Devender Rao Gourkanti Room No.616,6Th Floor . H.No.8-2-293/82/Nl/231 Aaykar Bhawan Mla Mp Colony Basheerbagh Jubilee Hills Hyderabad-500 004 Hyderabad-500 033 Pan : Akepg7452N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri H.Srinivasulu Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 20.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2023 O R D E R Per Shri Rama Kanta Panda (A.M.): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 16.06.2022 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad Relating To Ay 2021-22. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Partner In M/S. Yashoda Helathcare Services Pvt.Ltd & Derives Partner’S Remuneration & Interest On Capital. He Filed His Original Return Of Income On 28.12.2021 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.8,56,33,070/- A Search & Seizure Operation U/S. 132 Of The I.T. Act Was Conducted In The Case Of Yashoda Group On 22.12.2020, During Which The Case Of The Assessee Was Also Covered. In Response To Notice U/S. 153A Of The I.T.Act,The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income Admitting Additional

For Appellant: Shri H.SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 34

…ipal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Bajargan Traders C/o. Kalani & Co. CA, Jaipur, vide D.B.I.T.A No.258/2017,order dated 12.09.2017 vi. Hon’ble AP High Court in the case of PClT vs Deccan Jewellera P.Ltd, Deccan Tobacco Company, DTE Exports P.Ltd, reported in 438 ITR 131 (AP) vii. ITAT Surath Bench in the case of Shivam Developers Vs PCIT, 100 reported in ITR (Trib) 29. viii. Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Babulal K. Daga Vs CIT, Gujarat reported in 387 ITR 114(Guj) ix. ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Gandhi Ram Vs PCIT, Chandigarh vide ITA 121/Chd/2021 order dated 04.08.2022 x. Hon’ble Kerala Hig…

Late Sh. Vijay Kumar Johari (Through L/H Smt. Hema Johari, Sh. Vaibhav Johari & Sh. Varun Johari), 63, Om Nivas, Masjid Wali Gali, 22 Godam, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 241/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 69

…during the survey is related to its business and therefore, the undisclosed income declared 8 Late Shri Vijay Kumar Johari, Jaipur. during the survey is assessable under the head 'Business income' and not u/s 69A. PCIT Vs. Deccan Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) (HC) The head note of the decision reads as under:- Income from undisclosed sources—Vis-a-vis business income—Excess stock found during search—Explanations have been offered by the assessees that excess stock was a result of suppression of profits from business over the years and is a part of the overall stock found and therefore excess st…

M/S Agya Ram Manohar Lal, Khanna vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 454/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Nov 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT -DR
Section 115BSection 153ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 69Section 69C

…hat he has taken the possible view and it cannot be subject matter of revision under section 263 of the Act. In support, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Deccan Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 as well as decision of the Coordinate Chandigarh Benches in case of M/s Sham Jewellers and M/s Shyam Fashion Mall (ITA No. 275/Chd/2022 and 315/Chd/2022 vide order dt. 22/08/2022) wherein it was held that where the assessee has no other source of income either disclosed or unearthed by the Revenue except business income, the invocation of provisi…

M/S Sham Jewellers, Chandigarh vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -1, Chandigarh

In the result, ITA No. 315/Chd/2022 also stands

ITA 375/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)

…esorted to taxing the income of the assessee at the rate of 60% in terms of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 10.18 The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) held that where the assessee was engaged in the business of Gold and Diamond jewellery and Silver articles and during the search and seizure operation u/s 132, excess stock was found to be declared and the assessee had submitted that excess stock was result of 52 375-Chd-2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) – M/s Sham Jewellers, Chandigarh suppression of p…

M/S Sham Fashion Mall, Chandigarh vs. The Dy.C.I.T., Central Circle -1, Chandigarh

In the result, ITA No. 315/Chd/2022 also stands

ITA 315/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)

…esorted to taxing the income of the assessee at the rate of 60% in terms of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 10.18 The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Deccan Jewellers Ltd. reported in (2021) 438 ITR 131 (AP) held that where the assessee was engaged in the business of Gold and Diamond jewellery and Silver articles and during the search and seizure operation u/s 132, excess stock was found to be declared and the assessee had submitted that excess stock was result of 52 375-Chd-2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) – M/s Sham Jewellers, Chandigarh suppression of p…