Surjeet Singh Chhabra v. Union of India

1 SCC 508Supreme Court of India1997#2429 most cited

What is Surjeet Singh Chhabra v. Union of India authority for?

Retracted confessions or admissions made under oath are binding on the assessee unless it is proven that the statement was involuntary, made under coercion, or duress. Income Tax officers are not police officers, making such admissions valid evidence.

47

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Surjeet Singh Chhabra v. Union of India · retracted confession · admission binding · statement under oath · coercion · duress · voluntary statement · section 132(4) · income tax assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132(4A)Section 153ASection 269SSSection 269STSection 269TSection 40A(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 133(a)section 153b(1)(a)time barred assessmentsection 148(1)hundi transactionretracted statementsection 153(1)(a)statement under section 132(4)bona fide mistakesection 2(12a)section 131(1)section 23(3)

Judgments citing Surjeet Singh Chhabra v. Union of India

Shri Raju P. Mehta, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - II (1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for assessment

ITA 171/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Feb 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos. 168 To 173/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) Mr. Raju P.Mehta, Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 40, Barnaby Road, Income Tax, Kilpauk, Central Circle Ii(1), Chennai-600 010. Chennai-600 034. Pan : Aafpm 1912N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) ""यथ"/Respondent/

For Appellant: Mr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CITFor Respondent: 23.12.2020
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153C

…edible evidence, the Court rejected the plea of the assessee that those admissions were made under coercion or duress and were not voluntary. Drawing support from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Surjeeet Singh Chhabra v. Union of India [19971 1 SCC 508 the Tribunal disallowed plea of retraction of the assessee on the ground that neither the ground of coercion or duress nor the ground of involuntary statement was proved to have existed at the time of recording of the statement. This decision of the Tribunal goes to indicate that admissions or confessions made in the statements recorded during sear…

Shri Raju P. Mehta, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - II (1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by assessee for assessment

ITA 168/CHNY/2020[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Feb 2021AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A Nos. 168 To 173/Chny/2020 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) Mr. Raju P.Mehta, Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of 40, Barnaby Road, Income Tax, Kilpauk, Central Circle Ii(1), Chennai-600 010. Chennai-600 034. Pan : Aafpm 1912N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) ""यथ"/Respondent/

For Appellant: Mr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CITFor Respondent: 23.12.2020
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153C

…edible evidence, the Court rejected the plea of the assessee that those admissions were made under coercion or duress and were not voluntary. Drawing support from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Surjeeet Singh Chhabra v. Union of India [19971 1 SCC 508 the Tribunal disallowed plea of retraction of the assessee on the ground that neither the ground of coercion or duress nor the ground of involuntary statement was proved to have existed at the time of recording of the statement. This decision of the Tribunal goes to indicate that admissions or confessions made in the statements recorded during sear…

The ITO, Kollam vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 477/COCH/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…retraction after long delay is invalid and the sworn statement and 'Panchanama' revealed no coercion/threat was employed while recording statement. 6.4 The Ld. DR placed reliance on the following case laws: i) Surjit Singh Chabra vs. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 508 (SC) ii) T.S. Kumaraswamy vs. ACIT (65 ITD 188) (ITAT, Chennai) wherein it was held that it is well known that ITOs are not Police Officers and they do not use or resort to unfair means or III degree methods in recording oath statements and therefore whatever is confessed and admitted before them during the course of search operations or during th…

The ITO, Kollam vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 476/COCH/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…retraction after long delay is invalid and the sworn statement and 'Panchanama' revealed no coercion/threat was employed while recording statement. 6.4 The Ld. DR placed reliance on the following case laws: i) Surjit Singh Chabra vs. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 508 (SC) ii) T.S. Kumaraswamy vs. ACIT (65 ITD 188) (ITAT, Chennai) wherein it was held that it is well known that ITOs are not Police Officers and they do not use or resort to unfair means or III degree methods in recording oath statements and therefore whatever is confessed and admitted before them during the course of search operations or during th…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre, Kottarakkara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 326/COCH/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Feb 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153A

…retraction after long delay is invalid and the sworn statement and 'Panchanama' revealed no coercion/threat was employed while recording statement. 6.4 The Ld. DR placed reliance on the following case laws: i) Surjit Singh Chabra vs. Union of India (1997) 1 SCC 508 (SC) ii) T.S. Kumaraswamy vs. ACIT (65 ITD 188) (ITAT, Chennai) wherein it was held that it is well known that ITOs are not Police Officers and they do not use or resort to unfair means or III degree methods in recording oath statements and therefore whatever is confessed and admitted before them during the course of search operations or during th…

Smt Shikha Sadhukhan, Howrah vs. ITO, WD-44(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1233/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A. No. 1233/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Shikha Sadhukhan...............................…………………………..............Appellant C/O. Smt. Krishna Sadhukhan, 21/1, Sri Aurobindo Road, Howrah - 711106 [Pan: Btups5119Q] Ito, Ward 44(1) ……………………………………………………………………Respondent 3, Govt. Plact (West) Ground Floor Kolkata - 700001 Appearances By: Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Saurav Kumar, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 28, 2017 Date Of Pronouncing The Order September 20, 2017 Order This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 19.02.2016 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Assessee Received Compensation From New India Insurance Co. Ltd. As She Lost Her Husband & Two Children In A Car Accident. The Insurance Company Delayed The Payment Of Compensation. The Assessee Filed An Appeal Before The Hon’Ble High Court & The Hon’Ble High Court Directed The Insurance Company To Pay The Compensation Of Rs. 10,26,500/- Plus Interest @ 9% For The Period

Section 194ASection 2

…ng kept out of the money, which ought to have been paid to him. In this way it is part and parcel of the compensation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tejinder Singh 4 I.T.A. No. 1233/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Smt. Sikha Sadhukhan Gujral, 1 SCC 508 (2007). Similarly in case of Abati Bexbaruah vs Dy. Director General, GSI, 3 SCC 148 has held that interest is compensation for forbearance or detention of money and that interest being awarded to a party only for being kept out of the money which ought to have been paid to him. In case of Dharampal & Others vs U.P. State Road Transport Corporation…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi -8 vs. Shri Santosh Kumar Garg

ITA/209/2016HC Delhi28 Mar 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

…not exhaustive of the law relating to pre-suit interest. 17. I find a Division Bench of this Court in Bank of Maharashtra Vs. G.K. Enterprises (2005) 122 DLT 655 to have, relying on Secretary, Irrigation Department, Govt. of Orissa Vs. G. C. Roy (1992) 1 SCC 508 held that interest is recoverable both at law and in equity on money obtained by fraud or conversion and retained by the defendant and that it is always open to the Court, as the Interest Act is not exhaustive of all claims of interest, to appreciate the facts of each case and then to grant interest in cases not coming strictly within the purv…