V.Kunhambu & Sons. v. CIT

219 ITR 235High Court1996#4405 most cited

What is V.Kunhambu & Sons. v. CIT authority for?

A voluntary declaration made during a survey or search can be relied upon for assessment, even if later retracted, unless proven to be made under threat or coercion.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

V. Kunhambu & Sons v. CIT · section 132(4) · section 133A · voluntary declaration · retraction of statement · undisclosed income · search and seizure · burden of proof · assessment

Also reported as

215 CTR 313

Sections most often in play

Section 115Section 132Section 132(3)Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 271AAASection 292C

Issues it is cited on

section 133section 133asection 132(4)undisclosed incomesearch and seizuresection 132section 13transferpersonindiacompanydocument

Judgments citing V.Kunhambu & Sons. v. CIT

Sh. Sanjay Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2765/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Shri Sanjay Jain, Dcit, Cc-01, I-42, Ashok Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 Vs Pan-Aagpj1372G Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Adv. Shri Shyam Sunder, Adv. & Shri Dishant Seth, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2025

Section 132Section 132(4)

…59 ITD 29 Works of Art (P) Ltd. vs ACIT (ITAT, Jp.) 65 ITD 40 Amrital Bhagwandas Soni vs DCIT (ITAT, Ahd.) 59 TTJ 418 Hiralal Maganlal & Co. vs DCIT (ITAT, Mum.) 96 ITD 113 Airport Authority of India vs CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196 Ravindra D. Trivedi vs CIT (Raj.) 215 CTR 313 D. When statement was made voluntary and was not alleged to have been obtained under threat or coercion, onus was on assessee to prove that said declaration was made under any misconception of facts - Since assessee had not taken any steps to rectify its declaration before authorities before whom such declaration was made, there was no valid reas…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur vs. Chetanaya Promoters and Devlopers, Jabalpur

In the result, on this ground, appeal of the Revenue as well as appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 133/JAB/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur23 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Dhiraj Ghai, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 292BSection 43C

…e of Narayan Bhagwantrao Gosavi Balajiwale vs Gopal Vinayak Gosavi, AIR 1960 SC 100, Bombay High Court in the case of Sri Ramesh Chandra and Co. Vs. CIT (1987)(168 ITR 375) and decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Kunhambu & Sons Vs. CIT(1996) 219 ITR 235 (Ker). (ii) the disclosure cannot be retracted after a gap of 1 year & 10 months, the view finds support from the decision of Honourable ITAT "A" Bench, Banglore in the case of carpenters Classic (EXIM) Vs. DCIT reported in 108 TTJ 760 & Honourable ITAT "B" Bench, Ahemdabad in the case of DCIT Vs. Bogilal Mulchand Kondoi reported in 96 ITD 344. (…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Rakesh Kumar Garg, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 896/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Sidharth, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 50C

…lowing the decision laid by the Higher Courts in the cases : • Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Shyam Lal, AIR 2004 SC 4271 ; • Sowar Vs. S L Prasad, AIR 1978 Kant 25; • Rameshchandra and Co. Vs. CIT[1987] 168 1R 375; • Kumhambu (V.) and Sons Vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 235 • Mrs. Aanisa Batool Gilani Vs. ACIT (2008) 219 ITR 235; • Surjit Chhabra Vs. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 2560; • Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 relied upon by the Assessing Officer in his retirement order; 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,21,09.6…

M/S. Simtools Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-7(3) ( Earstwhile DCIT- Cent. Cir-42), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed as above

ITA 1574/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 32(1)Section 79

…dha group and thereafter that of Shri Abhinandhan Lodha. He referred to following case laws i) Surjeet Singh chhabra v. Union of India (SC) ii) TS Kumarasami v. ACIT , 65 ITD 188 (Mad.) iii) MK Mohammad Kunhi v. CIT 92 ITR 341 (ker.) iv) V Kunhikannan v CIT 219 ITR 235 (Ker.) v) Hotel Kiran v ACIT, 82 ITD 453 (Pune.Trib) vi) Dr.SC Gupta v. CIT, 248 ITR 782(Alld) 13. He concluded as under:- “Respectfully following the above judicial authorities on the subject, I hold as under:- (i) Statements in the nature of declarations covered by the provisions of Section 115 of the Evidence Act, are binding on the declaran…

M/S Paramount Impex, Ludhiana vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1097/CHANDI/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jun 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhaneshta, ACIT
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250(6)

…uld be recorded by the Authorised Officer during the search and such statement should be obtained on oath as held in the case of ACIT vs. Yerra Nagabhushanam (1997) 226 ITR 843, 849 (AP). Further, it has been held in the case of Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 235, 241-42 (Ker) that a statement recorded u/s 132(4) can be used as evidence in any proceedings under the act by virtue of the provisions of the explanation to sec 132(4) and such a statement may not only be related to the books of accounts found during the search but also on any other matter relevant for any proceedings under the Act. The only con…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 391/RJT/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 390/RJT/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 389/RJT/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Laljibhai Khimjibhai Patel, Bhuj vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhuj

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 388/RJT/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 715/RJT/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 714/RJT/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 713/RJT/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

Shri Lalji Khimji Patel, Bhuj vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrasl Circle-II, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 712/RJT/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Written SubmissionsFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…gainst whom the allegations were labeled is having no evidentiary value and the same is rejected and ignored for deciding the issue raised in this ground of appeal. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in K Kunhanbam & Sons 219 ITR 235 (Ker) and on the decision of the Hon'ble Third Member Bench of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel 89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM).” 11. The assessee in his submissions has reiterated his stand that no evidence was found at the time of search. Merely on the basis of statement recorded under section 132(4) additions cannot…

A.S.Chinmai, Hassan vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Hassan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3434/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member Ita No.3434(Bang)/2018 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) Shri A.S.Chinmai, Prop: Sri Kanaka Jewellers, B.M.Road, Hassan Pan No.Aftpc1672C Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Vijayanagar, Belur Road, Hassan Respondent Appellant By : Shri B. Sharath Kumar, Advocate Respondent By : Shri Siddappajji, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Shri B. Sharath Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Siddappajji, Addl.CIT
Section 133A

…td., Vs. A CIT (ITA 7; Jp) 65 LTD 40 (iv) Amritla/ Bhagwandas Son! Vs. DCIT (ITA 7; Ahd) 59 Ti] 418 (v) I-/ira/al Magan/al & Co., Vs. DCIT(ITA 7; Mum) 96 IT!) 113 (vi) Airport Authority of India Vs. CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196 (v/i) Ravindra D. Tr/ved/ Vs. UT(Raj) 215 CTR 313 • An admission is the best evidence that an opposing party can rely upon and though not conclusive, is decisive of the matter, unless successfully withdrawn or proved erroneous. (i) Narayan Bhagwantrao Gosavi Batajiwale Vs. Gopal ALT 1960 Sc 100 (ii) Prana v Construction Co. Vs. A CIT (ITA T, Mum) 61 Ti] 145 15. Thus, the position of law with reg…

ACIT, Ajmer vs. Shreeji Sulz Pvt. Ltd

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 669/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Prakhul Khurana (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…P/2016_ Shreeji Sulz P Ltd. Vs ACIT 4.1.5 For the purpose of making the impugned addition, the Ld. AO has relied upon the following judicial precedents: i. Kanti Lal Prabhu Das Patel (93 ITD 117 — Indore) ii. Ramesh T Salve (75 ITD 75) iii. V. Kunhikannan (219 ITR 235 to 243): The aforesaid judgments relied upon by the Ld. AO in the impugned assessment order are pertaining to admission and retraction of the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act. However, in the present case, no declaration was made by Sh. Navneet Somani u/s 132(4) of the Act for the purpose of impugned addition on account of alleged excess…

Shreejesulz Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 507/JPR/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 May 2019AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Prakhul Khurana (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…P/2016_ Shreeji Sulz P Ltd. Vs ACIT 4.1.5 For the purpose of making the impugned addition, the Ld. AO has relied upon the following judicial precedents: i. Kanti Lal Prabhu Das Patel (93 ITD 117 — Indore) ii. Ramesh T Salve (75 ITD 75) iii. V. Kunhikannan (219 ITR 235 to 243): The aforesaid judgments relied upon by the Ld. AO in the impugned assessment order are pertaining to admission and retraction of the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act. However, in the present case, no declaration was made by Sh. Navneet Somani u/s 132(4) of the Act for the purpose of impugned addition on account of alleged excess…

Sajjan Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1458/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

…of Art Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT ( ITAT, Jp ) 65 ITO 40 d. Amritlal Bhagwandas Soni Vs DCIT ( ITAT, Ahd) 59 TTJ 418 e. Hiralal Maganlal & Co. Vs DCIIT (ITAT, Mum) 96 ITD 113 f. Airport Authority of India Vs CBEC (Del) 207 CTR 196 g. Ravindra D Trivedi Vs CIT (Raj) 215 CTR 313 5. In the case at hand, I find that the appellant has unable to bring on record even an iota of evidence that. the statement was improperly procured from him, or that any coercion or duress was used against him. 6. In my considered view the disclosure was against specific incriminating documents, and therefore the assessee- appellant was bound…

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

…97) 1 SCC 108. iii) Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (ITAT, Bang.) iv) CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540) (SC) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) v) V.Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (219 ITR 235) (Ker.) vi) Ravindra D. Trivedi vs. CIT 215 CTR 313 (Raj.) For retraction to be valid, threat or coercion has to be proved. 6.5 The next argument raised by the Revenue in these appeals is that the CIT(A) overlooked the findings of the AO that the income generated from the unaccounted sales was invested for purchase of immovable properties in 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

…97) 1 SCC 108. iii) Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (ITAT, Bang.) iv) CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540) (SC) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) v) V.Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (219 ITR 235) (Ker.) vi) Ravindra D. Trivedi vs. CIT 215 CTR 313 (Raj.) For retraction to be valid, threat or coercion has to be proved. 6.5 The next argument raised by the Revenue in these appeals is that the CIT(A) overlooked the findings of the AO that the income generated from the unaccounted sales was invested for purchase of immovable properties in 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

…97) 1 SCC 108. iii) Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd vs. DCIT (108 ITD 142) (ITAT, Bang.) iv) CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (82 ITR 540) (SC) I.T.A. Nos.326/Coch/2016 & 476 &477/Coch/2018 (Sunny Jacob Jewellers & Wedding Centre) v) V.Kunhambu & Sons vs. CIT (219 ITR 235) (Ker.) vi) Ravindra D. Trivedi vs. CIT 215 CTR 313 (Raj.) For retraction to be valid, threat or coercion has to be proved. 6.5 The next argument raised by the Revenue in these appeals is that the CIT(A) overlooked the findings of the AO that the income generated from the unaccounted sales was invested for purchase of immovable properties in th…

V.Kunhambu & Sons. v. CIT (219 ITR 235) — Cited in 27 Judgments | BharatTax