COMMR OF INCOME TAX AP-I HYD vs. M/S.LANCO CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. HYD
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal found that the disallowances were made based on entries in the assessee's regularly maintained books of account and finalized statements. The information leading to the disallowances was not obtained from any material seized during the search operations.
What were the facts?
The appeal was filed against an ITAT order that deleted an addition of Rs.82,13,065/- made in a block assessment. The addition was based on the purported ground that no material pertaining to the transactions was seized during the search.
What were the issues?
Whether additions in a block assessment can be made without any material seized during search operations. Whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting additions made on grounds not supported by seized material.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 158,Section 13
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE H0N’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
I.T.T.A. No.28 OF 1999
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 11.03.2009 of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench ‘B’, Hyderabad.
2 . This Court, by order, dated 01-12-1999, admitted the appeal on the following substantial question of law:
“Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.82,13,065/- made in Block Assessment on the purported ground that no material pertaining to the transactions has been seized in the course of search under Section 13 of the I.T.Act.?”
3 . We have heard Mr.S.R.Ashok, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and gone through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal.
The learned Tribunal, on fact, found that none of the items tabulated in the order, is liable to be treated as undisclosed income in the course of block assessment under Section 158 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and that while disallowance of Rs.80,00,000/- towards service charges claimed as paid to T.Rama Murthy, was made on the ground that the assessee had not availed any service so as to warrant such a huge payment of service charges, thus doubting the genuineness of the payment claimed, and that all the four other disallowances were made on the grounds of unreasonableness of the amounts claimed in the books of account, and inadmissible nature of the expenditure claimed. It is further held by the learned Tribunal that, these disallowances were made on the basis of the entries in the books of account regularly maintained by the assessee in its regular
course of business and the finalized statements of account, such as profit and loss account etc., and even the returns filed for the years covered by the block assessment in normal course, and that the information leading to the disallowance is not obtained from any entry in the assessing officer has access even otherwise than through material found at the time of search operations.
It is settled proposition of law that addition can be made on profit assessment, if such amount is tallying with any material, which was found at the time of search operations. It is not the case here. Hence, we do not find any merit in this appeal.
Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.
_____________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
_______________ K.C.BHANU, J
23.7.2013 DRK/HSD
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE H0N’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
I.T.T.A. No.28 OF 1999 (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
23.7.2013
More judgments on Section 13
- Ramkrishna Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle…ITA 66/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Karnataka Samarpana Education Society… vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions)…ITA 1439/BANG/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2026-27
- Bucher Hydraulics Private Limited, Gurgaon vs ACIT Tp 1(1)(1), New DelhiITA 1872/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- St John the Evangelist Church, Andheri… vs CIT(Exemption), Mumbai, CumballaITA 5627/MUM/2026[2026-27]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2026-27
- Richmond Educational Society, Noida vs PCIT (Central), KanpurITA 5485/DEL/2026[2026-27]Status: Heard18 Sept 2026AY 2026-27
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026