Video Master v. JCIT

378 ITR 374Supreme Court of India2015#2072 most cited

What is Video Master v. JCIT authority for?

A statement made by an assessee or their partner during a search and seizure operation, disclosing undisclosed income, constitutes valid evidence that can be used to uphold an income addition, negating claims of a lack of evidence.

56

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Video Master v. JCIT · Section 132(4) statement · Section 153A assessment · evidentiary value of statement · admission during search and seizure · disclosure of undisclosed income · partner's statement as evidence · assessment based on statement · no evidence claim · voluntary admission of income

Also reported as

66 Taxmann.com 361282 CTR 221

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 131(1A)Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

voluntary admissionsection 133(a)section 158bb(1)section 158b(b)retraction of statementsection 153b(1)(a)section 158bbtime barred assessmentsection 148(1)section 153(1)(a)bona fide mistakestatement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing Video Master v. JCIT

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 986/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sri T.M. Shivakumar

…laim\nand does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the\nassessment made in this regard.\n19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws:\n(i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of\nVideo Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein\nheld as under:\n“A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the\nassessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed\ncertain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to\nthe income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by\npartner could be used as evidence and accord…

JOHN DISTILLERIES PVT LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 985/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

…laim\nand does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the\nassessment made in this regard.\n19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws:\n(i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of\nVideo Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein\nheld as under:\n\n“A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the\nassessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed\ncertain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to\nthe income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by\npartner could be used as evidence and acco…

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 847/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

JOHN DEVELOPERS ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 846/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

JOHN DEVELOPERS,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 845/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

ITA 842/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

…laim\nand does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the\nassessment made in this regard.\n19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws:\n(i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of\nVideo Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein\nheld as under:\n“A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the\nassessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed\ncertain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to\nthe income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by\npartner could be used as evidence and accord…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

M/S. PAUL RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.,,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…the claim and does not stand in the way of the evidences found and the assessment made in this regard. 19.2 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

LAXMI MEMORIAL EDUCATION TRUST ,MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, MANGALORE

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

ITA 756/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Srinivas Kamath, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 132

…llected by the appellant from the students as unaccounted cash receipts in A.Y 2021-22 to be sustained. 4.4 Further, she relied on the following case laws: (i) Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 374 (SC), wherein held as under: “A search and seizure operation was carried on at premises of the assessee’ firm and others where in partner of the assessee disclosed certain undisclosed income. Accordingly, an addition was made to the income of the assessee. The Tribunal held that statement made by partner could be used as evidence and accordingly…

M/S. EMIRATES HINDUSTAN BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 415/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Guru Kumar S., D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…u/s 153C of the Act. For this purpose, she relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshanlal Sanchiti Vs. CCIT 292 Taxman 549 (SC). 7.1 Further, she relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT (378 ITR 374), wherein held that “it is not possible to say that this is the case of no evidence at all in as much evidence in the form of statement made by assessee himself and other corroborative material are there on record.” 7.2 For the same proposition, she relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abdul Razak, wherein h…

M/S. EMIRATES HINDUSTAN BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

ITA 414/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…u/s 153C of the Act. For this purpose, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshanlal Sanchiti Vs. CCIT 292 Taxman 549 (SC). 7.1 Further, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT (378 ITR 374), wherein held that “it is not possible to say that this is the case of no evidence at all in as much evidence in the form of statement made by assessee himself and other corroborative material are there on record.” 7.2 For the same proposition, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abdul Razak, wherein h…

MKH INFRASTRUCTURE,KERALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

ITA 175/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…u/s 153C of the Act. For this purpose, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshanlal Sanchiti Vs. CCIT 292 Taxman 549 (SC). 7.1 Further, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT (378 ITR 374), wherein held that “it is not possible to say that this is the case of no evidence at all in as much evidence in the form of statement made by assessee himself and other corroborative material are there on record.” 7.2 For the same proposition, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abdul Razak, wherein h…

MKH INFRASTRUCTURE,KERALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 174/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Guru Kumar S., D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…u/s 153C of the Act. For this purpose, she relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshanlal Sanchiti Vs. CCIT 292 Taxman 549 (SC). 7.1 Further, she relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT (378 ITR 374), wherein held that “it is not possible to say that this is the case of no evidence at all in as much evidence in the form of statement made by assessee himself and other corroborative material are there on record.” 7.2 For the same proposition, she relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abdul Razak, wherein h…

TABESCO HINDUSTAN INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD.,,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

ITA 168/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…u/s 153C of the Act. For this purpose, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshanlal Sanchiti Vs. CCIT 292 Taxman 549 (SC). 7.1 Further, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT (378 ITR 374), wherein held that “it is not possible to say that this is the case of no evidence at all in as much evidence in the form of statement made by assessee himself and other corroborative material are there on record.” 7.2 For the same proposition, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abdul Razak, wherein h…

TABESCO HINDUSTAN INFRA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD., ,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , MANGALORE

ITA 167/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…u/s 153C of the Act. For this purpose, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Roshanlal Sanchiti Vs. CCIT 292 Taxman 549 (SC). 7.1 Further, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Video Master Vs. JCIT (378 ITR 374), wherein held that “it is not possible to say that this is the case of no evidence at all in as much evidence in the form of statement made by assessee himself and other corroborative material are there on record.” 7.2 For the same proposition, she relied on the judgement of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abdul Razak, wherein h…

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. ENN VEE HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 1841/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member, Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 1837/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 1838/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Vs M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, 9B, Vandana Building, 11, Tolstoy New Delhi-110002 Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCR1956R ITA No. 1840/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 ITA No. 1841/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Vs M/s ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, 9B, Vandana Building, 11, Tolstoy Ne…

DCIT, CC-31, NEW DELHI vs. ENN VEE HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 1840/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Neeraj Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member, Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 1837/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 1838/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Vs M/s Realtime Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, 9B, Vandana Building, 11, Tolstoy New Delhi-110002 Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCR1956R ITA No. 1840/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 ITA No. 1841/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 DCIT, Vs M/s ENN VEE Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-31, 9B, Vandana Building, 11, Tolstoy Ne…

Showing 1–20 of 56 · Page 1 of 3