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 366,005 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

Mohd. Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur vs. Deputi Commissioner of Income Tax CC-2, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA

ITA 139/LKW/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2018-19 Dcit, Cc-2 V. Shri Mohammad Asfand Laxmi Niwas, 10/503, Akhtar Allenganj, Kanpur-208001. Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Mohammad Asfand Akhtar V. Dcit, Central Circle-Ii Plot No.02, Block-B, Scheme-39, 10/503, Allenganj, Kanpur- Ram Rai Ki Sarai, Jajmau, 208001. Kanpur Nagar-208010. Tan/Pan: Aempa0823R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 41Section 41(1)Section 68Section 69C

…et aside and addition of Rs.14,00,000/- is deleted. The appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed.” 33. It is further humbly submitted that It was held in the case of Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT reported in 263 ITR 101 (Ker) apex court judgment reported in 91 ITR 18 (SC) and CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son reported in 300 ITR 157 (Mad) that no addition is called for also in view of CBDT Instruction. Section 133A of the Act empower any authority to examine any person on oath, and such statement has an evidentiary value and any admission made during the search such statement cannot be itself be made the basis for addi…

Raghvender Shankar Finance & Investment Company Private Limted, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-15(1), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8572/DEL/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/S Singhal Fasteners Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Pvt. Ltd. Circle-24(2), Room No.248, 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Vs C.R. Building, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacs1428H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/S Shankar Radhey Finance Income Tax Officer & Investment Company Ward-23(1), Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 Ag-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110088 Pan-Aabcs0968H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Raghvender Shankar Income Tax Officer, Finance & Investment Ward-15(1), Company Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 Ag-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110052 Pan-Aabcs0968H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Abhishek Mathur, Ca Revenue By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/s Singhal Fasteners Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Pvt. Ltd. Circle-24(2), Room No.248, 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Vs C.R. Building, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 PAN-AAACS1428H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/s Shankar Radhey Finance Income Tax Officer, and Investment Company Ward-23(1), Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 AG-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110088 PAN-AABCS0968H Appellant Res…

Shankar Radhey Finance & Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO Ward 23(1), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1067/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/S Singhal Fasteners Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Pvt. Ltd. Circle-24(2), Room No.248, 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Vs C.R. Building, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacs1428H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/S Shankar Radhey Finance Income Tax Officer & Investment Company Ward-23(1), Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 Ag-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110088 Pan-Aabcs0968H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Raghvender Shankar Income Tax Officer, Finance & Investment Ward-15(1), Company Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 Ag-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110052 Pan-Aabcs0968H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Abhishek Mathur, Ca Revenue By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/s Singhal Fasteners Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Pvt. Ltd. Circle-24(2), Room No.248, 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Vs C.R. Building, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 PAN-AAACS1428H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/s Shankar Radhey Finance Income Tax Officer, and Investment Company Ward-23(1), Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 AG-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110088 PAN-AABCS0968H Appellant Res…

Singhal Fastners Co. P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-24(2), New Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1066/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Krinwant Sahay, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/S Singhal Fasteners Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Company Pvt. Ltd. Circle-24(2), Room No.248, 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Vs C.R. Building, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaacs1428H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/S Shankar Radhey Finance Income Tax Officer & Investment Company Ward-23(1), Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 Ag-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110088 Pan-Aabcs0968H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2006-07] M/S Raghvender Shankar Income Tax Officer, Finance & Investment Ward-15(1), Company Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 Ag-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110052 Pan-Aabcs0968H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Abhishek Mathur, Ca Revenue By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2025

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/s Singhal Fasteners Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Pvt. Ltd. Circle-24(2), Room No.248, 67-68, Rampuri, Govind Puri, Vs C.R. Building, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 New Delhi-110002 PAN-AAACS1428H Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year: 2009-10] M/s Shankar Radhey Finance Income Tax Officer, and Investment Company Ward-23(1), Private Limited, Vs New Delhi-110002 AG-5, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi-110088 PAN-AABCS0968H Appellant Res…

Om Prakash Gupta, Sawai Madhopur vs. DCIT Central Circle -1, Jaipur

The appeals of the assessee are disposed off as under :

ITA 399/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 153ASection 69

…bstantial questions of law framed by the appellant pertained to an open issue which stands concluded by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court; one such decision was rendered in "M/s Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala And Another" [1973] 19 ITR 18. Respectfully following the above binding precedent, we are of the considered view that merely based on the statement which was retracted no addition can be made. 12.4 Be that it may so now let us examine the credit amount in the Bank account of Shri Ram Singh Meena added in the hands of the assessee as unexplained money for an amount of Rs.7,94,…

Surya Singhal, Kota vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 928/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69

…y brushing aside the submission and evidences filed by assessee during the course of assessment proceeding. We place reliance on following judgements: - i) Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pullangode Rubber Produce Co Ltd v/s State of Kerala &Anothers (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC) has held that admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it can't be said that it is conclusive. It is upon to the assessee to show that it is incorrect. ii) Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v/s Ashok Kumar Soni 291 ITR 172 (Raj.) has held that admission in statement during search is not conclusive proof of fact a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal vs. Vindhyachal Brothers, Obaidullaganj

Appeal is dismissed being devoid of

ITA 380/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2018-19 Acit Vindhyachal Brothers, Bhopal Patwari Halka No.10, बनाम/ Hoshangabad Road, Vs. Obaidullaganj (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Pan: Aahfv2315A Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Assesseeby Shri Yashwant Sharma, Ar Date Of Hearing 05.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025

Section 143(3)

…taxmann.com 227 (Rajasthan) (SLP of assessee dismissed), Bannnalal Jat Constructions P Ltd (2019) Page 2 of 24 Vindhyachal Brothers ITA No. 380/Ind/2024 – AY 2018-19 106 Taxmann.com 128 (SC) and Pullan-gode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC)?” 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the discrepancy was only for one month and the AO extrapolated the same to 12 months without there being any evidence for the remaining months, without appreciating the surrender of Rs. 1,08,07,260/- was made by the partner of asses…

Sh. Vinod Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result both these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 647/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’Ble

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 68Section 69B

…IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR ‘A’ BENCH: JAIPUR Before Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’ble Accountant Member, and Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’ble Judicial Member ITA No. 646&647/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year 2018-19 & 2019-20) Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Vs ACIT, Central Circle, Kalani & Co., Chartered Accountants, Kota. 5th Floor, Mile Stone Building, Gandhinagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur – 302015. PAN No. ABPPJ1500N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri P.C. Parwal, C.A. Revenue by Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR. Date of Hearing 16.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.09.2025 ORDER Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: These two…

Sh. Vinod Kumar Jain, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result both these appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 646/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’Ble

Section 115BSection 132(4)Section 68Section 69B

…IN THE INCOMETAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR ‘A’ BENCH: JAIPUR Before Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’ble Accountant Member, and Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’ble Judicial Member ITA No. 646&647/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year 2018-19 & 2019-20) Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Vs ACIT, Central Circle, Kalani & Co., Chartered Accountants, Kota. 5th Floor, Mile Stone Building, Gandhinagar Turn, Tonk Road, Jaipur – 302015. PAN No. ABPPJ1500N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri P.C. Parwal, C.A. Revenue by Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR. Date of Hearing 16.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.09.2025 ORDER Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: These two…

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

ITA 632/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

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 325/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

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, Chennai vs. Kag India Private Limited, Chennai

ITA 324/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

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 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…

Hiralal Vijawat, Bhawanimandi vs. ACIT / DCIT Central Circle Kota, Kota

ITA 614/JPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Aug 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, Adv. (VC)For Respondent: Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, SR. DR
Section 133ASection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69C

…that the income was from business is not found to be acceptable. Hence, the deeming provisions are clearly applicable. The appellant stated that It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. vs State of Kerala & Others 91 ITR 18 (SC): "Such admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive. It is open to the assessee who made the admission to show that it is incorrect and the assessee should be given a proper opportunity to show that the books of accounts do not disclose the correct state of facts". The decision relied u…

Skandhanshi Infra Projects, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 535/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

…eized material lacks critical details such as entity-wise, project-specific, and customer-wise particulars, rendering the admission conditional and unsubstantiated. In support of this submission, the appellant relied on: • Pullangode Rubber Produce Co., 1973 91 ITR 18 SC, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that admissions are not conclusive evidence and can be rebutted to show that admission is incorrect. • Naresh Kumar Agarwal v. (2015) 53 taxmann.com 306 where it was held that statements made without supporting evidence lack any provable value. v) The appellant further argued that while the AO accepted t…

Skanda Builders, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 532/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

…seized material lacks critical details such as entity-wise, project-specific, and customer-wise particulars, rendering the admission conditional and unsubstantiated. In support of this submission, the appellant relied on: • Pullangode Rubber Produce Co., 1973 91 ITR 18 SC, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that admissions are not conclusive evidence and can be rebutted to show that admission is incorrect. • Naresh Kumar Agarwal v. (2015) 53 taxmann.com 306 where it was held that statements made without supporting evidence lack any probative value. v) The appellant further argued that while the AO accepted th…

Skanda Builders, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 530/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

…he seized material lacks critical details such as entity-wise, project-specific, and customer-wise particulars, rendering the admission conditional and unsubstantiated. In support of this submission, the appellant relied • Pullangode Rubber Produce Co., 1973 91 ITR 18 SC, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that admissions are not conclusive evidence and can be rebutted to show that admission is incorrect. • Naresh Kumar Agarwal V. (2015) 53 taxmann.com 306 where it was held that statements made without supporting evidence lack any probative value. v) The appellant further argued that while the AO accepted…

Skandhanshi Infra Projects India Private Limited, Kurnool vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 518/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

…t the seized material lacks critical details such as entity-wise, project-specific, and customer-wise particulars, rendering the amount conditional and unsubstantiated. In support of this submission, the appellant relied • Pullangode Rubber Produce Co., 1973 91 ITR 18 SC, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that admissions are not conclusive evidence and can be rebutted to show that admission is incorrect. • Naresh Kumar Agarwal v. CIT (MP) (2015) 53 taxmann.com 306 where it was held that statements made without supporting evidence lack any probative value. v) The appellant further argued that while the AO…