AMISH ANANTRAI MODI,MUMBAI vs. DY CTI-CC-2(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessments made under Section 153C were not sustainable due to jurisdictional defects, specifically the absence of incriminating material found during the search. Consequently, additions based on these assessments were deleted.
What were the facts?
A search and seizure operation in the group case of M/s. Navjivan Charitable Trust revealed that the assessee provided accommodation entries to the trust by returning cash after deducting commission. Assessments were made under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the validity of assessments made under Section 153C without incriminating material. Other issues involved jurisdiction, natural justice, and the merits of additions related to capital gains, cash credits, and commission income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 153C,Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 10(38),Section 127,Section 153D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(6)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. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.1,823 citing374 ITR 645 · 2015 · HC
- CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd.689 citing380 ITR 612 · 2016 · HC · Read judgment
- P.R. Metrani v. CIT187 citing287 ITR 209 · 2006 · SC · Read judgment
- Pepsico India Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT95 citing50 Taxmann.com 299 · 2014 · HC
- 8 SOT 691 (Mum.) and Gargi Din Jwala Prasad v. CIT49 citing96 ITR 97 · 1974 · HC
- CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society in Civil Appeal Nos.11080 to 11083 of5 citing397 ITR 34 · 2017 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN
Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member:
For the sake of brevity afo
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Jharkhand Contractors Association Thro Its President- Pramod Kumar vs. Bharat Coking Coal LTD. Thro Its Chairman Cum Managing DirectorJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Isc Processors Private Limited vs. Superintendent,Range-Iv, Burrabazar Div, CGST And Cx, Kolkata (N) Commissionerate And AnrCalcutta · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Raashi Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Bidasaria Fenster Solutions vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 13 Oct 2026
- Amit Agency vs. Commissioner, CGST And CxPatna · 13 Oct 2026