THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL-3 vs. ALLIED PERFUMERS PVT. LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court upheld the ITAT's decision, stating that the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153C was not sustainable as no incriminating material related to the assessee was found during the search.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that quashed assessments made under Section 153C. The ITAT found no incriminating material was seized during the search to justify the reassessment.
What were the issues?
Whether the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under Section 153C was valid when no incriminating material was found during the search operation pertaining to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 153C,Section 132,Section 143(3),Section 260A,Section 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cited by 54 judgments on BharatTax
See all citing judgments →Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.
- Raghav Kumar, New Delhi v. ACIT Central Circle-29, New DelhiDelhi · 2025-10-15
- Raghav Kumar, Delhi v. ACIT Central Circle 29, New DelhiDelhi · 2025-10-15
- Smt. Sharada, Legal Heir of Late Shri. Muttegere Javaregowda Appaji., Shimoga v. Deputy Commissioner of…Bangalore · 2025-09-19
- Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat v. Antique Exim Pvt. Ltd., SuratSurat · 2023-11-23
- Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2, Surat v. Tanman Jewels Pvt. Ltd., SuratSurat · 2023-11-23
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 v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society1,589 citing84 Taxmann.com 290 · 2017 · SC
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
(ORAL)
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
CM APPL. 17945/2019 (exemption) in ITA 391/2019
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 17946/2019 (condonation of delay in re-filing) in
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 →- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026