SHABNAM BHARATINDER SINGH,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the satisfaction recorded by the AO for initiating proceedings under Section 153C was invalid as it did not demonstrate that the seized material had a bearing on the determination of the assessee's total income. Consequently, the proceedings initiated under Section 153C and the consequent assessment orders were quashed.
What were the facts?
Proceedings under Section 153C were initiated against the assessee based on certain diary entries found during a search on a third party. The Assessing Officer (AO) recorded satisfaction that the documents pertained to the assessee, but failed to establish that these entries had a bearing on the assessee's total income.
What were the issues?
Whether the satisfaction recorded by the AO for initiating proceedings under Section 153C was valid, and if the seized material had a bearing on the assessee's total income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)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.
- Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal583 citing70 Taxmann.com 95 · 2016 · HC · Read judgment
- Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer196 citing161 Taxmann.com 485 · 2024 · HC
- Vinod Solanki v. UOI18 citing16 SCC 537 · 2008 · SC
- Commissioner of Central Excise v. Vikram Cement (P.) Ltd.3 citing52 Taxmann.com 133 · HC
- Continental Cement Company v. Union of India3 citing49 Taxmann.com 374 · 2014 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals are filed by assessee against the separate orders, both dated 17.03.2025 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-30, NewDelhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. 30/10352/2017-18 and in Appeal No. 30/10590/2018-19 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment orders, both dated 30.03.2023 passed u/s 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019- 20 respectively.
As both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee have similar issues which are inter-linked, inter-connected and this fact has been admitted by both the parties during the course of hearing
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 →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026