What is Sri Krishna v. CIT, Kanpur & Others authority for?

An affidavit filed by an assessee, when remaining uncontroverted and unrebutted by the revenue through cross-examination or counter-evidence, must be accepted as true and reliable. The rejection of such an affidavit without discrediting the deponent or requiring supporting evidence is not justified.

How many judgments cite Sri Krishna v. CIT, Kanpur & Others?

41 judgments on BharatTax cite Sri Krishna v. CIT, Kanpur & Others (142 ITR 618), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sri Krishna v. CIT, Kanpur & Others come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 115BBE, Section 131, Section 132(4), Section 139(1).

Sri Krishna v. CIT, Kanpur & Others (142 ITR 618)

PUSA NANDA KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE3-(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 154/HYD/2021[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.154/Hyd/2021 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2007-2008) Sri Pusa Nanda Kumar, The Dcit, Hyderabad - 500001. Central Circle-3(1), Vs. Hyderabad – 500 004. Pan Acupp6100E (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: MS U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR

Section 131Section 153ASection 50CSection 68

…at Courts of law or Tribunals, which are the last fact finding authorities in this case, adopted this course. 16. In paragraph 11 of the order under appeal, a reference is made to a decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Sri Krishna v. CIT [1983] 142 ITR 618. While it is true that statements made on affidavit remaining uncontroverted must not be accepted as true and reliable, it is clear that in the absence of contemporaneous record or any attempt to falsify the statements on oath, the Tribunal has no business to rely on the principle emerging from this decision. In the instant case, the Tribunal fou…

SHRIKANT SINGHANIA,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JPR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2017-18 and AY 2019-20

ITA 1221/JPR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 153ASection 69C

…ated 03-06-2019 (iv) Hon’ble Jaipur ITAT in the case of Shri Radhey Shyam Mittal ITA No 420/JP/2012 dated 26.08.2013 (v) Dilip Kumar Rao Vs CIT (1974) 94 ITR 1 (Bom); (vi) Malwa Knitting Works Vs CIT (1977) 107 ITR 379, 381 MP (vii) Sri Krishna Vs CIT (1983) 142 ITR 618 (All). Ld. AR further submitted that images recovered from mobile are deaf and dumb and most of the images are not properly visible and readable. Most of the images are rough estimation/calculations, undated, unnamed and no proper conclusion can be drawn from these images. These images are incoming images in whatsapp chat. The Ld. AO has quantifi…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN-CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI vs. MR RASHMIN GIRDHARILAL RUGHANI, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross

ITA 2143/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

…lier statement was recorded under duress and coercion. recorded under duress and coercion. Mr. Rashmin Girdharlal Raghani 8 Mr. Rashmin Girdharlal Raghani ITA Nos. 2143 & 2142 & CO No. 116 & ITA Nos. 2143 & 2142 & CO No. 116 & 117/Mum/2023 i. In the case of 142 ITR 618 (Allahabad), Ram Ratan vs CIT, it In the case of 142 ITR 618 (Allahabad), Ram Ratan vs CIT, it In the case of 142 ITR 618 (Allahabad), Ram Ratan vs CIT, it has been held that "Ordinarily, in the a has been held that "Ordinarily, in the absence of denial, the bsence of denial, the statements may be accepted as true but if there are statements may…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN-CIRCLE 4(1), MUMBAI vs. MR RASHMIN GIRDHARILAL RUGHANI, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and cross

ITA 2142/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR

…lier statement was recorded under duress and coercion. recorded under duress and coercion. Mr. Rashmin Girdharlal Raghani 8 Mr. Rashmin Girdharlal Raghani ITA Nos. 2143 & 2142 & CO No. 116 & ITA Nos. 2143 & 2142 & CO No. 116 & 117/Mum/2023 i. In the case of 142 ITR 618 (Allahabad), Ram Ratan vs CIT, it In the case of 142 ITR 618 (Allahabad), Ram Ratan vs CIT, it In the case of 142 ITR 618 (Allahabad), Ram Ratan vs CIT, it has been held that "Ordinarily, in the a has been held that "Ordinarily, in the absence of denial, the bsence of denial, the statements may be accepted as true but if there are statements may…

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 147/JPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Manish Tatiwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) &

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)

…led by an assessee is not justified unless the deponent has either been discredited in cross-examination or has failed to produce other supporting evidence when called upon to do so. [Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT (1956) 30 ITR 181 (SC), Sri Krishna v. CIT (1983) 142 ITR 618 (All), Dilip Kumar Roy v. CIT (1974) 94 ITR 1 {Bom.). CIT vs. Bedi & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (198) 230 ITR 580 (SC). The affidavits filed cannot be rejected outright without cross examination A finding given by the appellate Tribunal without considering the affidavit concerning a material evidence may not be sustainable at law even though the Tribunal had…

SHRI ONKAR SINGH ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee ITA No

ITA 48/ASR/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…riculture land. It is for the department to prove that the Assessee had earned this huge amount in the year under assessment in a day. 6. That the Learned CIT (A) herself accepted the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Karishna V/s CIT (All.)142 ITR 618 in which it was held that the statement made in an Affidavit which remains uncontroverted, must inverbally be accepted as true and reliable. 7. That the Assessee filed Affidavit explaining the source of deposit out of sale proceeds of agriculture land, but the Learned AO did not cross examine the Assessee nor rebutted the content of the Affidavi…

SHRI ONKAR SINGH,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee ITA No

ITA 47/ASR/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…riculture land. It is for the department to prove that the Assessee had earned this huge amount in the year under assessment in a day. 6. That the Learned CIT (A) herself accepted the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Karishna V/s CIT (All.)142 ITR 618 in which it was held that the statement made in an Affidavit which remains uncontroverted, must inverbally be accepted as true and reliable. 7. That the Assessee filed Affidavit explaining the source of deposit out of sale proceeds of agriculture land, but the Learned AO did not cross examine the Assessee nor rebutted the content of the Affidavi…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BPTP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2665/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2663/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2664/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2665/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Bptp Ltd., Central Circle-23, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccb2442A Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, Ca Revenue By : Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

…pon to do so (Ref. Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT (1956) 30 ITR 181, 187 (SC), Dilip Kumar Roy v. CIT (1974) 94 ITR 1 (Bom); Malwa Knitting Works v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 379, 381 (MP); Vasanji Ghela & Co. v. CST (197) 40 STC 544, 561 (Bom); Sri Krishna v. CIT (1983) 142 ITR 618 (All); CIT v. Birbal Khanna & Co. (1983) 33 CTR (MP) 240:Netram Mool Chand v. CST (1984) Tax LR (NOC) 113 (All)). In view of above it is submitted that no addition was called for in regard to the discount recorded in the account of M/s Brijwasi Impex Pvt. Ltd. (i) Pages 7, 14, 28 and 32 of Annexure A-1/BO-III ITA Nos. 2663, 2664 & 2665/Del/20…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BPTP LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2663/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2663/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 2664/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 2665/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Acit, Vs M/S Bptp Ltd., Central Circle-23, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccb2442A Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, Ca Revenue By : Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.04.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR

Section 132(4)Section 132ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 153A

…pon to do so (Ref. Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT (1956) 30 ITR 181, 187 (SC), Dilip Kumar Roy v. CIT (1974) 94 ITR 1 (Bom); Malwa Knitting Works v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 379, 381 (MP); Vasanji Ghela & Co. v. CST (197) 40 STC 544, 561 (Bom); Sri Krishna v. CIT (1983) 142 ITR 618 (All); CIT v. Birbal Khanna & Co. (1983) 33 CTR (MP) 240:Netram Mool Chand v. CST (1984) Tax LR (NOC) 113 (All)). In view of above it is submitted that no addition was called for in regard to the discount recorded in the account of M/s Brijwasi Impex Pvt. Ltd. (i) Pages 7, 14, 28 and 32 of Annexure A-1/BO-III ITA Nos. 2663, 2664 & 2665/Del/20…

BHANUBHAI D. SHIYAL,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , MORBI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 12/RJT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot16 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Dipak M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. D. Gupta, DR

Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

…which suggests that the statements on affidavit it should not be accepted as true, the absence of denial by the other side, would not by itself, be sufficient to clothe the statements on affidavit with truthfulness and reliability. Sri Krishna V/s CIT (All) 142 ITR 618 Affidavits are either affirmed as true to knowledge or from information received provided the source of information is disclosed or as to what the deponent believes to be true, provided the grounds for such belief are stated. If an affidavit lacks such verification, it is no of use. Shri Bhanibhai D. Shiyal vs. ITO Asst.Year – 2012-13 It can be…

SH. SUKHPAL CHOWDHARY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 342/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Dec 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri T. R. Talwar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Chaudhary

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69

…Assessing Officer. The bald assertion by the appellant that no notice was ever served upon him is not supported by any evidence of mis- direction of notice, absence of appellant from the station, etc. The Allahabad High Court in the case of Sri Krishna vs CIT 142 ITR 618 had opined that an affidavit need not always be accepted as correct. An affidavit may be self-serving. It is also noted that the appellant filed, within time, an appeal against the assessment order which was sent to the same address, at which service of notice is denied. In these circumstances, the sole testimony of the appellant that notice was…

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR MAHESHWARI C/O B.P. MUNDRA & CO. CA, MUNDRA HOUSE, 822, A, SHIVAJI NAGAR, CIVIL LINES, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the addition of Rs 13,69,096/- is hereby directed to be deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri B. P. Mundra (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 69B

…d correct. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT [1956] 30 1TR 181 (SC) (i) Dilip Kumar Ray v. CIT [1974] 94 ITR 1 (Born.); (ii) Malwa Knitting Works v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 379 (MP) and (iii) Sri Krishna v. CIT [1983] 142 ITR 618/13 Taxman 309 (All.). (iv) 5.2 In view of the above the jewellery received from Ajay Maheshwari & considered as unexplained by the AO is not tenable. The addition of Rs.8,95,890 + Rs. 1,44,400 is directed to be deleted. Jewellary claimed to have been received from (Late Sh. Ramswaroop Maheshwari- Father of Appellant) Shri Vijay Kumar Maheshwari…

SHRI ASHISH MAHESHWARI C/O B.P. MUNDRA & CO. CA, MUNDRA HOUSE, 822, A, SHIVAJI NAGAR, CIVIL LINES, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the addition of Rs 13,69,096/- is hereby directed to be deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 526/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri B. P. Mundra (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 69B

…d correct. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT [1956] 30 1TR 181 (SC) (i) Dilip Kumar Ray v. CIT [1974] 94 ITR 1 (Born.); (ii) Malwa Knitting Works v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 379 (MP) and (iii) Sri Krishna v. CIT [1983] 142 ITR 618/13 Taxman 309 (All.). (iv) 5.2 In view of the above the jewellery received from Ajay Maheshwari & considered as unexplained by the AO is not tenable. The addition of Rs.8,95,890 + Rs. 1,44,400 is directed to be deleted. Jewellary claimed to have been received from (Late Sh. Ramswaroop Maheshwari- Father of Appellant) Shri Vijay Kumar Maheshwari…

SHRI DHRUV MAHESHWARI C/O B.P. MUNDRA & CO. CA, MUNDRA HOUSE, 822, A, SHIVAJI NAGAR, CIVIL LINES, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DY.CITI, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the addition of Rs 13,69,096/- is hereby directed to be deleted and the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 525/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri B. P. Mundra (CA)For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (CIT)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 69B

…d correct. Reliance is also placed on the following decisions Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT [1956] 30 1TR 181 (SC) (i) Dilip Kumar Ray v. CIT [1974] 94 ITR 1 (Born.); (ii) Malwa Knitting Works v. CIT [1977] 107 ITR 379 (MP) and (iii) Sri Krishna v. CIT [1983] 142 ITR 618/13 Taxman 309 (All.). (iv) 5.2 In view of the above the jewellery received from Ajay Maheshwari & considered as unexplained by the AO is not tenable. The addition of Rs.8,95,890 + Rs. 1,44,400 is directed to be deleted. Jewellary claimed to have been received from (Late Sh. Ramswaroop Maheshwari- Father of Appellant) Shri Vijay Kumar Maheshwari…

SHRI KULDIP SINGH,MOHALI vs. ITO, W-6(4), MOHALI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1442/CHANDI/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 1442/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Kuldeep Singh Income Tax Officer, बनाम Vill. Gharuan, Tehsil Kharar, Ward 6(4), Mohali Distt. Mohali "थायीलेखासं./Pan No : Dqeps 7365R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Meenakshi Vohra, Addl. CIT

Section 250(6)

…the point of affidavit filed by them nor rebutted the content of the affidavit which remain uncontroverted, must inverbalkly be accepted as true and reliable as held in case of Mehta Parikh & Co. Vs. CIT (1956) 30 ITR 186, 187 (S.C. and Kanshna Vs. CIT(All) 142 ITR 618. Kuldeep Singh v. ITO, Mohali 4 8. The assessee craves leave to add or delete any grounds of appeal at the time of appellate proceedings.” The solitary issue, as is evident from the grounds reproduced above, relates to additions made amounting to Rs. 91,29,248/- on account of cash deposits in bank remaining unexplained. The cash deposited in t…