← All Phrases

“survey under section 133A”

Search & SeizureSection 133ASection 133A734 judgments

The decision most relied on for survey under section 133A is CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (352 ITR 480), cited in 581 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on survey under section 133A

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son
352 ITR 480 · 2013 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

Statements recorded during a survey under Section 133A do not have evidentiary value as Section 133A does not empower examination on oath. Consequently, additions to income cannot be made solely based on such uncorroborated statements without other credible evidence.

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son
300 ITR 157 · 2008 · High Court
452
citing judgments

A statement recorded under duress during a survey, if subsequently retracted, has no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for an income-tax assessment; the assessment should instead rely on audited accounts.

Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT
263 ITR 101 · 2003 · High Court
266
citing judgments

A statement recorded under Section 133A of the Income-tax Act has no evidentiary value because Section 133A does not empower an Income-tax Officer to examine any person on oath.

CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals
335 ITR 259 · 2011 · High Court
149
citing judgments

No penalty under section 271(1)(c) can be imposed if the amount of tax sought to be evaded is nil under Explanation 4(c), such as when the assessment results in a refund even after an addition to income. The conditions stipulated in the explanations to section 271(1)(c) must be unambiguously met for penalty imposition.

CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works
328 ITR 384 · 2010 · High Court
113
citing judgments

Statements recorded and materials collected during a survey under Section 133A are not made on oath, unlike those under Section 132(4), and thus are not conclusive evidence; an income addition cannot be made solely based on such statements.

Raj Hans Towers (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (
373 ITR 9 · 2015 · High Court
86
citing judgments

Additions made for amounts surrendered during a search or survey operation are justified if the assessee fails to provide a satisfactory and bona fide explanation for the surrendered amount or to substantiate its retraction.

Bachittar Singh v. CIT
328 ITR 400 · 2010 · High Court
66
citing judgments

A statement recorded under section 133A, though not possessing the same evidentiary value as a sworn statement under section 132(4), cannot be considered irrelevant material and can be relied upon, especially when the assessee fails to produce regular books of account.

Bansal v. ACIT
63 Taxmann.com 199 · 2015 · ITAT
59
citing judgments

A statement made or income surrendered during search or survey proceedings, especially if later retracted, requires corroborating evidence to form the basis of an assessment, aligning with CBDT instructions to focus on evidence collection rather than confessions.

Judgments citing survey under section 133A

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5560/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132 or survey under section 133A, it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed— (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other

Sh. Gurmeet Singh, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5559/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. C. M. Gargdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 5559/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2006-07 Ita No. 5560/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2007-08 Ita No. 5561/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5562/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5563/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Ita No. 5564/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Ita No. 5565/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Gurmeet Singh, Vs Dcit, C-168, Anand Vihar, Central Circle-20, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Ita No. 5756/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2008-09 Ita No. 5757/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Ita No. 5758/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Acit, Vs Gurmeet Singh, Central Circle-8, C-168, Anand Vihar, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqps9561E Assessee By : Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Paresh Johri, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 09.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.03.2023

For Appellant: Sh. Gurdev Singh Chawla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Paresh Johri, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 234BSection 292CSection 68

thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132 or survey under section 133A, it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed— (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other

Late Shri Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora, Surat vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Surat

In the result, ground no.4 raised by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1706/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1706/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Physical Court Hearing) Bhimsen Darbarilal Arora Through, Vs. The Acit, Circle-5, L/H. Rajat Bhimsen Arora, Surat. Smt. Mamta Bhimsen Arora, A-201, Madhulika Apartment, Bhatar Road, Surat. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acaps9230L

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

proceeding under this Act", as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive piece of evidence by itself. For all these reasons, particularly, when the Commissioner and the Tribunal followed the circular of the Central

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Sandeep Indrajeet Suri, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 233/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 Feb 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.233/Nag/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Dcit, Central Circle- Shri Sandeep Indrajeet Suri, 2(1), Nagpur. Vs 600/A-12, Ratandeep Housing Society, Byramji Town, Nagpur. Pan: Aveps 0599 R Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 271A

There was a search under section 132 of the Act on 07.03.2013 in the case of Kondawar Group of cases. A survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted in the case of Assessee i.e. Sandeep I. Suri. An assessment order under section 144 r.w.s 143(3) was passed

Krc Gems Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

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

ITA 6757/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Ananad, Sr.DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

order dated 27.01.2022 and submitted that the said assessee, i.e, M/s. Priya Diamonds is a sister concern of the assessee-company and the survey under Section 133A were carried out on both the concerns by the Investigation Wing simultaneously. The ld. counsel submitted that in the identical facts while

M/S. Bellezza (India) Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur vs. ACIT, Circle- 2, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 74/NAG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.74/Nag/2015 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S.Bellazza (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit, Circle-2, Lg-3, Achraj Tower-Ii, Vs Nagpur. Chhaoni Chowk, Chhindwara Road, Nagpur – 13. Pan: Aaccb 4029 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri S.C.Thakar – Ar Revenue By Shri G.J.Ninawe - Dr Date Of Hearing 17/11/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Nagpur Dated 05.11.2014 Emanating From The Order Of Acit(Ao) Dated 30.12.2011 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act,1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1] A.C.I.T. Erred In Rejecting The Audited Books Of Account & Estimated Income @ 5% Of Total Receipts & Also Adding Additional Income Of Rs.30 Lacs To The Returned Income. Learned C.I.T.(A) Has Confirm The Addition Without Any Basis. 2] Learned C.I.T.(A) & A.C.I.T. Erred In Not Accepting The Assessee’S Various Submission & Supporting Documents Filed By The

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 37

Rs.30,09,760/-. As per the assessment order, assessee has a chain of beauty salon in different cities of India. There was a survey under section 133A of the Act at various premises of the assessee company during the F.Y. 2008-09 on 25/02/2009. During assessment proceedings , the Assessing Officer

Sajjan Bajaj vs. Pr. C. I. T

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/PAT/2016[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Patna05 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(3)

section 263 and thereby setting aside the assessment order for passing a fresh assessment. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a survey under section 133A was conducted in the business premises of the assessee on 01.03.2011. The assessee has filed return of his income on 31.03.2012 disclosing total

Sai Shraddha Enterprises, Palghar vs. ACIT CC-3, Thane

In the result, all the four appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1807/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(3)Section 153C

partnership firm engaged in the business of builders and developers. A search was carried out under Section 132 of the Act and survey under Section 133A of the Act was also carried out on 31st July, 2014 in Ameya Group of cases. The survey under Section 133A ... were not seized in the case of search action under Section 132 of the Act, but these are the documents impounded during the survey under Section 133A of the Act and therefore, all these four assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) read with section 153C

Sai Shraddha Enterprises, Palghar vs. ACIT CC-3, Thane

In the result, all the four appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1805/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(3)Section 153C

partnership firm engaged in the business of builders and developers. A search was carried out under Section 132 of the Act and survey under Section 133A of the Act was also carried out on 31st July, 2014 in Ameya Group of cases. The survey under Section 133A ... were not seized in the case of search action under Section 132 of the Act, but these are the documents impounded during the survey under Section 133A of the Act and therefore, all these four assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) read with section 153C

Sai Shraddha Enterprises, Palghar vs. ACIT CC-3, Thane

In the result, all the four appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1804/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(3)Section 153C

partnership firm engaged in the business of builders and developers. A search was carried out under Section 132 of the Act and survey under Section 133A of the Act was also carried out on 31st July, 2014 in Ameya Group of cases. The survey under Section 133A ... were not seized in the case of search action under Section 132 of the Act, but these are the documents impounded during the survey under Section 133A of the Act and therefore, all these four assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) read with section 153C

Sai Shraddha Enterprises, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-3, Thane

In the result, all the four appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1803/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: Shri. H.N. Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153(3)Section 153C

partnership firm engaged in the business of builders and developers. A search was carried out under Section 132 of the Act and survey under Section 133A of the Act was also carried out on 31st July, 2014 in Ameya Group of cases. The survey under Section 133A ... were not seized in the case of search action under Section 132 of the Act, but these are the documents impounded during the survey under Section 133A of the Act and therefore, all these four assessment orders passed under Section 143(3) read with section 153C

Dy.Comm of Income Tax CC 5(2) Central RG. -5, Mumbai vs. Parshvanath Comtrade LLP, Mumbai

ITA 1947/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Parsvanatha Comtrade Llp Dcit-Cc-5(2) F 501, Sterling Court, Central Range-5, Maheshwari Nagar, Room No.1906, Marol-Midc Road Andheri Air India Building, Vs. Nariman Point, (E) Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 093 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaqfp9841A Assessee By : Shri Rakesh Joshi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Achal Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2022

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 24(1)(i)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(x)

case is that assessee is a limited liability partnership firm filed its return of income on 20th November, 2020 at ₹ 15 lacs. A survey under Section 133A of the Act was carried out on the Responsive Group on 22nd October, 2019. Assessee was also covered in the survey. Assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore vs. Mr. Shorff Krishnarajasetty Satheesha, Kodagu

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

ITA 997/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153C

found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132 1[or survey under section 133A], it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed— (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article

ACIT 29 (3), Mumbai vs. Zeemag Industries, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2266/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri P. DanielFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Singh
Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250

29/09/2013, declaring a total income of Rs. 10,39,73,830. During the year, the assessee has shown income from the business. A survey under section 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 13/02/2013. During the survey, physical inventory of stock was taken

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2698/CHNY/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

other two entities viz., M/s. Balaha Chemicals and M/s. Gem Enterprises, Chennai, aggregating to the tune of ₹.2, 73,69,761/-. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee and his father, Shri Durga Das Vyas (He is the Proprietor

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2697/CHNY/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

other two entities viz., M/s. Balaha Chemicals and M/s. Gem Enterprises, Chennai, aggregating to the tune of ₹.2, 73,69,761/-. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee and his father, Shri Durga Das Vyas (He is the Proprietor

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2696/CHNY/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

other two entities viz., M/s. Balaha Chemicals and M/s. Gem Enterprises, Chennai, aggregating to the tune of ₹.2, 73,69,761/-. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee and his father, Shri Durga Das Vyas (He is the Proprietor

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2695/CHNY/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

other two entities viz., M/s. Balaha Chemicals and M/s. Gem Enterprises, Chennai, aggregating to the tune of ₹.2, 73,69,761/-. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee and his father, Shri Durga Das Vyas (He is the Proprietor

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2694/CHNY/2018[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

other two entities viz., M/s. Balaha Chemicals and M/s. Gem Enterprises, Chennai, aggregating to the tune of ₹.2, 73,69,761/-. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee and his father, Shri Durga Das Vyas (He is the Proprietor

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2693/CHNY/2018[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

other two entities viz., M/s. Balaha Chemicals and M/s. Gem Enterprises, Chennai, aggregating to the tune of ₹.2, 73,69,761/-. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out in the business premises of the assessee and his father, Shri Durga Das Vyas (He is the Proprietor