← All Phrases

“survey under section 133A”

Search & SeizureSection 133ASection 133A734 judgments

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7844/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7843/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7842/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the Assessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight than a statement made during a survey under Section 133A. ---- He further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract his statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7841/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7840/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the Assessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight than a statement made during a survey under Section 133A. ---- He further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract his statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7839/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S VESTIGE MARKETING PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 7838/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel andFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -05 , DELHI

ITA 5521/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarabefore Shri Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godarasatbeer Singh Godara & Satbeer Singh Godara & And & Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra, , , Shri Naveen Chandra Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel and Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the Assessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight than a statement made during a survey under Section 133A. ---- He further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract his statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5520/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2023-24
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5519/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2022-23
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5518/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-05, DELHI

ITA 5517/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2020-21
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5516/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

VESTIGE MARKETING PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 05, DELHI

ITA 5515/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 37Section 37(1)Section 69A

statement on oath recorded by the\nAssessee under Section 132(4) of the Act carries more weight\nthan a statement made during a survey under Section 133A.\nHe further submitted that the Assessee had not chosen to retract\nhis statement till ten months after the date of the search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. RAVISHANKAR, SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2626/CHNY/2025[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Ms. Padmavathy, S.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2626/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Ravishankar, Income Tax, 735, Lrc Abarana Maaligai, Circle 1, Bazaar Street, Attur Tk, Salem. Salem 636 102. [Pan: Aahhr5519N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.05.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 18, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 55 Days. The Dcit Circle 1, Salem Filed A Condonation Petition For The Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Dcit Are Bonafide, Which 2

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CITFor Respondent: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 69B

section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] were issued. According to the Assessing Officer, a survey under section 133A of the Act conducted at the premises M/s. LRC Abarana Maaligai on 06.02.2019 and found that the assessee is the owner of bullion, jewellery or other

PIYUSH ASHOK MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Assessee in the present appeal in allowed

ITA 9092/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Ms. Deepika Arora
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.” 3. As per the reason recorded for re-opening the assessment, a survey under Section 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of M/s Vinay Unique Developers, an associate concern of Cosmos Group. During the proceedings that

PIYUSH ASHOK MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Accordingly, Ground No. 2 raised by the Assessee in the present appeal in allowed

ITA 9091/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Ms. Deepika Arora
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.” 3. As per the reason recorded for re-opening the assessment, a survey under Section 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of M/s Vinay Unique Developers, an associate concern of Cosmos Group. During the proceedings that

M/S SUGEE TEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 8287/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Bhagat Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

year, the assessee entered into a development agreement with the landowners for the construction of buildings named “Janaki Niwas” and “Gangadhar Niwas.” A survey under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 12.03.2024. During the course of the survey proceedings

M/S SUGEE TEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 8286/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Bhagat Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

year, the assessee entered into a development agreement with the landowners for the construction of buildings named “Janaki Niwas” and “Gangadhar Niwas.” A survey under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 12.03.2024. During the course of the survey proceedings

M/S SUGEE TEN DEVELOPERS LLP,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD 2(2)(4),MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 8285/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita ShahFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjeev Bhagat Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

year, the assessee entered into a development agreement with the landowners for the construction of buildings named “Janaki Niwas” and “Gangadhar Niwas.” A survey under section 133A(2A) of the Act was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 12.03.2024. During the course of the survey proceedings

Showing 1–20 of 734 · Page 1 of 37

...