S.S. Ratanchund Bholanath v. CIT

210 ITR 682High Court1994#4818 most cited

What is S.S. Ratanchund Bholanath v. CIT authority for?

An assessment made based on an assessee's admission that a particular income is liable to be included in its total income is valid.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

S.S. Ratanchund Bholanath v. CIT · 210 ITR 682 · admission of income · valid assessment · section 132(4) · retracted statement · dumb documents

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 46ASection 131Section 154Section 250Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 271aabstatement under section 132(4)retracted statementdumb documentssection 271aajoint development agreementsection 271ajdasection 40a(3)on-moneytnmmsection 40a

Judgments citing S.S. Ratanchund Bholanath v. CIT

D.Shantha, Villupuram vs. ITO, Villupuram

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1828/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Nataraja, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण ,’ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन गणेशन . एस . आर . , "या"यक सद"य एवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम# BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1593, 1828 & 1829/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. D. Santha, Income Tax Officer, 16-A, Salem Mail Road, Vs. Ward -1(2), Kallakurichi, Villupuram. Villupuram District – 606 202. [PAN: ACGPS 4584H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1803/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year…

DCIT, Villupuram vs. D.Santha, Kallakurichi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1803/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Nataraja, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण ,’ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन गणेशन . एस . आर . , "या"यक सद"य एवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम# BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1593, 1828 & 1829/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. D. Santha, Income Tax Officer, 16-A, Salem Mail Road, Vs. Ward -1(2), Kallakurichi, Villupuram. Villupuram District – 606 202. [PAN: ACGPS 4584H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1803/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year…

D.Shantha, Villupuram vs. ITO, Villupuram

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1593/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Nataraja, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकरअपील"यअ"धकरण ,’ए’ "यायपीठ,चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन गणेशन . एस . आर . , "या"यक सद"य एवं"ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य केसम# BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1593, 1828 & 1829/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2008-09 & 2009-10 Smt. D. Santha, Income Tax Officer, 16-A, Salem Mail Road, Vs. Ward -1(2), Kallakurichi, Villupuram. Villupuram District – 606 202. [PAN: ACGPS 4584H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 1803/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year…

Dharam Pal Dhingra Prop. Dharampal Dhingra Electroncs vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeal is dismissed but no order as to

ITA/36/2008HC Delhi28 May 2008

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR

Section 132Section 260

…and the matter was treated as concluded. Generally, an admission is the best evidence that an opposing party may rely upon though not conclusive. Reference in this respect may be made to the judgments reported in 168 ITR 375 (Bom.), 122 ITR 926 (All.), 210 ITR 682 (M.P.) and 219 ITR 235 (Ker.). Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Durga Timber Work’s Vs. CIT, 79 ITR 63 (Del) and Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Mahavir Metal Works Vs. CIT, 92 ITR 513 have held that where an assessee himself voluntarily concedes that a particular item represented his income and surrender such inc…