Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala

91 ITR 18Supreme Court of India1973#84 most cited

What is Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala authority for?

Admissions, whether made through entries in account books or statements, are important pieces of evidence but are not conclusive. An assessee has the right to demonstrate that an admission made by them is incorrect or can be retracted.

666

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala · 91 ITR 18 · admission not conclusive · retraction of statement · statement under section 132(4) · evidentiary value of admissions · entries in account books as evidence · proving admission incorrect · Section 68 · Section 69A

Sections most often in play

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 147Section 68Section 69ASection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

retraction of statementretracted statementstatement under section 132(4)section 158bbsection 132(4a)dumb documentssection 132(4)on-moneysection 69bloose paperspanchnamasection 158b

Judgments citing Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3263/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and ShriFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Charudahry, CIT
Section 132

…ording to the provisions of law. If as per provisions of law, a particular amount is not taxable as income, such amount cannot be treated as income. 2. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber and Produce Company Limited Vs State of Kerala 1973(91 ITR 18) has held that an admission made is not conclusive and it is open to the person who made the admission to show that it is incorrect. 3. The CBDT vide instruction No. 286/2/2003 IT(Inv) has emphases that during search and seizure, there should be focus and concentration on collection of evidence of income and no attempt should be made to obtain conf…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3262/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and ShriFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Charudahry, CIT
Section 132

…ording to the provisions of law. If as per provisions of law, a particular amount is not taxable as income, such amount cannot be treated as income. 2. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber and Produce Company Limited Vs State of Kerala 1973(91 ITR 18) has held that an admission made is not conclusive and it is open to the person who made the admission to show that it is incorrect. 3. The CBDT vide instruction No. 286/2/2003 IT(Inv) has emphases that during search and seizure, there should be focus and concentration on collection of evidence of income and no attempt should be made to obtain conf…

Jsk Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-8(1), Mumbai

ITA 5891/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singh

Section 147Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.5891, 5892, 5893, 5894, 5895, 5896 & 5897/M/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 M/s. JSK Industries Pvt. Dy. CIT Ltd., Central Circle-8(1), 9 A.K. Naik Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Near New Empire M.K. Marg, Cinema, New Marine Lines, CST, Mumbai 400001 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AABCJ 5937F (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.6311, 6312, 6313, 6314, 6315 & 6316/M/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-1…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 99/RPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 98/RPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 97/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 96/RPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 95/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 94/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

Parthavi Construction Private Limited, Raipur vs. Assistat Commissioner of Incometax, Central Circle-1, Raipur

In the result, all the captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 93/RPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 93 To 99/Rpr/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2017-18) M/S. Parthivi Constructions Asst. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. Parthivi Pacific, 3Rd Floor, Central Circle-1, Raipur Commercial Complex, Near (C.G.) Axis Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp4406G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri R. B. Doshi, C.A. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri R. K. Singh, Cit.Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 09/08/2021 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing 26/10/2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Singh, CIT.DRFor Respondent: 09/08/2021
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…nature and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to explain the real state of affairs by direct or circumstantial evidence at any stage. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) and many other judicial precedents for the proposition that the addition cannot be made solely on the basis of averments made in the statements which are not final or conclusive. The statement so made can be deviated from by showing grounds for doing so. It was contended that if the whole gross receipts is taken as unaccounted income, the revi…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Balkishan Saraf, New Delhi

In the result we confirm the order of the ld CIT(A) in deleting the above three additions and dismiss the appeal of the revenue

ITA 5862/DEL/2011[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Shri Bal Kishan Saraf, Central Circle : 2, 1290 – Katra Dhulia, Vs. New Delhi. Chandni Chowk, Delhi. Pan: Aahps3659Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati [CIT] – D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)

…s in case of the assessee) is that of Sh. Rajeev Gupta and not of the assessee and therefore retraction if any is that of Sh. Rajeev Gupta and not that of the assessee. Reliance in this regard has also been placed on the decision in cases of Pullangode Rubber 91 ITR 18(C); Anoop Kumar 147 Taxman 26( ASR). Considering the totality of the arguments it is observed that the assessee has shown a total income of more than Rs. 10 Crores which is inclusive of an amount of Rs. 9,33,11,51 l/-which is on account of income representing documents seized during course of search. Thus it is case where the statement on oath made…

M/S Everfine Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3129/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…terating all the observations made by the Assessing Officer with respect to the modus operandi/ findings in the search. Further, she made reference to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala [91 ITR 18 (SC)] wherein it was held that an admission is an extremely important piece of evidence, but it cannot be said that it is conclusive and that it is upon the person who made the admission to 20 ITA.NO. 3129/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 2011-12) M/s. Everfine Constructions Pvt. Ltd., show that it is incorrect. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that in the present case, Shri…

M/S. Alankar Jewellwer, Vidisha vs. The ACIT- II, Vidisha

In the result, appeal filed by the assessees in

ITA 838/IND/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Rajpal Yadav Hon'Ble & Shri Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year:2016-17 M/S. Alankar Jewellers Acit-Ii Nikasha Road, Vidisha Bhopal बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D It(Ss)A No.205/Ind/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 Acit-Ii M/S. Alankar Jewellers Bhopal Nikasha Road, Vidisha बनाम/ Vidisha Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent ) P.A. No.Aavfa1527D Appellant By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Respondent By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.06.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manish Borad:

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 44ASection 69B

…d by the A.O. are not applicable on the facts of the present case. The assessee 14 Alankar Jewellers ITANo.838/Ind/2019& IT(SS)No.205/Ind/2019 has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. 91 ITR 18 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Court has held that admission cannot be said that it is conclusive. Retraction from admission was permissible in law and it was open to the person who made the admission to show that it was incorrect. However, reliance is placed on the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Chandrakumar…

The ITO 3(2), Indore vs. M/S. Apex Realities, Indore

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

ITA 912/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69BSection 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING Assessment Year 2015-16 M/s. Apex Realities 201, Puspratan Paradise, 9/5, New Palasia Indore : Appellant PAN ABAFA3997P V/s ITO-3(2) : Respondent Indore Assessment Year 2015-16 ITO-3(2) : Revenue Indore V/s M/s. Apex Realities 201, Puspratan Paradise, 9/5, New Palasia Indore : Respondent PAN ABAFA3997P Apex Realities ITA No.899 & 912/Ind/2018 Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantri, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri C.P. Rawka,…

M/S. Apex Realities, Indore vs. The ITO 3(2), Indore

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

ITA 899/IND/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore01 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 69Section 69BSection 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE HON’BLE RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VIRTUAL HEARING Assessment Year 2015-16 M/s. Apex Realities 201, Puspratan Paradise, 9/5, New Palasia Indore : Appellant PAN ABAFA3997P V/s ITO-3(2) : Respondent Indore Assessment Year 2015-16 ITO-3(2) : Revenue Indore V/s M/s. Apex Realities 201, Puspratan Paradise, 9/5, New Palasia Indore : Respondent PAN ABAFA3997P Apex Realities ITA No.899 & 912/Ind/2018 Revenue by Shri S.S. Mantri, CIT-DR Assessee by Shri C.P. Rawka,…

Pawan Kumar Mehta vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the substantial question of law Nos

ITA/561/2015HC Karnataka19 Jul 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260Section 260ASection 6

…s, reliance has been placed on decisions in 'MEHTA PARIKH & CO. VS. CIT', (1956) 30 ITR 181 8 (SC), 'LAKSHMI RICE MILLS VS. CIT', (1974) 97 ITR 258 (PATNA), 'CIT VS. MR P FIRM', (1965) 56 ITR 67 (SC) and 'PULLONGODE RUBBER VS. STATE OF KERALA', (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC). 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the assessee despite being afforded an opportunity to offer the explanation was unable to explain the cash difference of Rs.1,06,26,309/-. It is further submitted that cogent reasons have been assigned to assess the peak cash deficit in the cash book and the a…

Sh. Sandeep Agarwal, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2963/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 234A

…levant para of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court is reproduced as under: “12. The learned counsel for the appellant/assessee also referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Pullangode Rubber Products Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala: (1973) 91 ITR 18 SC for the proposition that an admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive. It was contended that it was open to the person who made the statement to show that it was incorrect. There cannot be any 10 doubt about this position in law, but, in the present case the appellant/assessee has not produ…

ACIT Range 1(1), Bhopal vs. Aisect Ltd., Bhopal

ITA 953/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)

…s in personal name. It is also stated that the case laws as relied by the A.o. are not applicable on the facts of the present case. The assessee has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. 91 ITR 18 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Court has held that admission cannot be said that it is conclusive. Retraction from admission was permissible in law and it was open to the person who made the admission to show that it was incorrect. However, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Chandrakumar…

ACIT Range 1(1), Bhopal vs. Aisect Ltd., Bhopal

ITA 952/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)

…s in personal name. It is also stated that the case laws as relied by the A.o. are not applicable on the facts of the present case. The assessee has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. 91 ITR 18 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Court has held that admission cannot be said that it is conclusive. Retraction from admission was permissible in law and it was open to the person who made the admission to show that it was incorrect. However, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Chandrakumar…

Aisect Ltd., Bhopal vs. ACIT Range 1(1), Bhopal

ITA 946/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Roy

Section 143(3)

…s in personal name. It is also stated that the case laws as relied by the A.o. are not applicable on the facts of the present case. The assessee has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. 91 ITR 18 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Court has held that admission cannot be said that it is conclusive. Retraction from admission was permissible in law and it was open to the person who made the admission to show that it was incorrect. However, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Chandrakumar…