PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1 vs. BHUSHAN STEEL LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court found that the appeals raised no substantial question of law. The ITAT's decision was based on the principle that additions under Section 153A should be based on material found during a search, and the impugned addition did not meet this criterion.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that upheld the quashing of an assessment order under Section 153A. The issue involved additions made on account of disallowance of zinc purchases, which were not based on material gathered during a search.
What were the issues?
Whether additions under Section 153A can be made based on material not found during a search, and the applicability of the Kabul Chawla judgment in such scenarios.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Kabul Chawla3,235 citing380 ITR 573 · 2016 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT (Central) v. Kabul Chawla186 citing2015 SCC OnLine DEL 11555 · 2015 · Read judgment
$~62 & 63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 144/2024 & CM APPL 12439/2024
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1 .... Appellant
Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC.
versus
BHUSHAN STEEL LTD.
..... Respondent
Through: None 63 + ITA 145/2024 & CM APPL 12442/2024
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1 ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, SSC.
versus
BHUSHAN STEEL LTD.
..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR
KAURAV
29.02.2024 O R D E R 1. Bearing in mind the disclosures made, the delay of 490 days in the refiling the appeals is condoned. CM APPL 12439/2024 & CM APPL 12442/2024 2. Applications shall stand disposed of. ITA 144/2024 & ITA 145/2024 3. The appellant impugns the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [“ITAT”] dated 11 March 2021 and proposes the following questions of law for our consideration: - “2.1 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:31:56
in law, the Id. ITAT was justified, in upholding the order of Id. CIT(A) in quashing the assessment order under section 153A read with section 143(3) holding that the AO was not within the jurisdiction bestowed on him by law to make the impugned addition of on account of disallowance of purchase of zinc from M/s Hindustan Zinc Ltd? 2.2 Whether the Id. ITAT erred in law and in fact by holding that no addition on fresh material received from Govt. agencies can be made in pending assessment u/s 153A thereby overlooking the fact that in the process the assessee has gone scot free with respect to the undisclosed income referred in the fresh material? 2.3 Whether the Id. ITAT erred in law and in fact by not appreciating that the information received from the Government agencies was sufficient to reopen the case under section 148 if there had been no pending proceedings u/s 153A on the date of such receipt of information? 2.4 Whether the Id. ITAT erred in law and in fact by not appreciating that the decision of this Hon'ble Court in the case of CIT Vs Kabul Chawla( 2016) 380 ITR 573( Delhi) has any application in a case where fresh incriminating material about undisclosed income is received from outside agencies when proceedings under section 153A is pending for the year?” 4. Undisputedly, the addition with respect to purchase of zinc was not material which had been gathered in the course of search. It is in the aforesaid context that the ITAT had rested its decision on the judgment rendered by this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Kabul Chawla [2015 SCC Online Del 11555]. 5. In view of the aforesaid, we find that the appeals raise no substantial question of law and consequently they shall stand dismissed.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. FEBRUARY 29, 2024/neha This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:31:56
More judgments on Section 153A
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, KanchipuramITA 2578/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Ig3 Infra Limited, OggiamthoraipakkaITA 2577/CHNY/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central… vs Shanmugham Thiagarajan, ChennaiITA 2576/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026