DY CIT -CC-2(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. H.K. ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) did not adequately address the issue of incriminating material for the Section 153A assessment and also failed to cogently address the Assessing Officer's adverse observations regarding unsecured loans. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.
What were the facts?
The assessee's settlement commission application was rejected, and a search action led to assessment under Section 153A. The Assessing Officer made additions based on unsecured loans and income offered before the Settlement Commission. The CIT(A) upheld the validity of the Section 153A assessment.
What were the issues?
The primary issues were the validity of the assessment under Section 153A without sufficient incriminating material and the proper examination of additions related to unsecured loans and settlement commission disclosures.
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. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.1,823 citing374 ITR 645 · 2015 · HC
- CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.248 citing232 Taxmann 270 · 2015 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H” Bench, Mumbai
Heard together (10 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :-
These are appeals by the assessee and Revenue arising out of respective orders of learned CIT(A).
Since the issues are common and connect
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 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. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026