134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain v. Union of India

207 ITR 55High Court1994#5229 most cited

What is 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain v. Union of India authority for?

The validity of a search under section 132, including the proper issuance and execution of the warrant, is a fundamental requirement for a valid assessment under section 153A. The Assessing Officer must adjudicate on the validity of the search to assume jurisdiction.

22

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

V. K. Jain v. Union of India · 134 ITR 655 · section 132 · section 153A · validity of search · search warrant · competent authority · execution of warrant · jurisdictional High Court · assessment proceedings · annulment of assessment

Issues it is cited on

section 132(2)section 132(1)(a)section 153(a)(1)section 250(1)abatement of assessmentsection 153a proceedingsannual letting valuesection 52section 153(a)section 53aproject completion methodsection 158bd

Judgments citing 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain v. Union of India

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…nishers Pvt Ltd, 374 ITR 595(SC) ii) Sri. C. Ramaiah Reddy Vs. DCIT, reported in 339 ITR 210 (Kar) iii) ITO Vs. Seth Brothers reported in (74 ITR 836) (SC) iv) Agarwal Iron Industries reported in (370 ITR 180) (SC) v) Southern Herbals Ltd vs DIT reported in (207 ITR 55) (Kar.) l) The ld. AR submitted that the learned Assessing Officer ought to have verified the following aspects before issuing the notice under section 153A of the Act as the same as sine qua non for a valid search under section 132 of the Act - i) Whether sanction of warrant has been properly issued by competent authority or not; Whether the wa…

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…nishers Pvt Ltd, 374 ITR 595(SC) ii) Sri. C. Ramaiah Reddy Vs. DCIT, reported in 339 ITR 210 (Kar) iii) ITO Vs. Seth Brothers reported in (74 ITR 836) (SC) iv) Agarwal Iron Industries reported in (370 ITR 180) (SC) v) Southern Herbals Ltd vs DIT reported in (207 ITR 55) (Kar.) l) The ld. AR submitted that the learned Assessing Officer ought to have verified the following aspects before issuing the notice under section 153A of the Act as the same as sine qua non for a valid search under section 132 of the Act - i) Whether sanction of warrant has been properly issued by competent authority or not; Whether the wa…

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

…nishers Pvt Ltd, 374 ITR 595(SC) ii) Sri. C. Ramaiah Reddy Vs. DCIT, reported in 339 ITR 210 (Kar) iii) ITO Vs. Seth Brothers reported in (74 ITR 836) (SC) iv) Agarwal Iron Industries reported in (370 ITR 180) (SC) v) Southern Herbals Ltd vs DIT reported in (207 ITR 55) (Kar.) l) The ld. AR submitted that the learned Assessing Officer ought to have verified the following aspects before issuing the notice under section 153A of the Act as the same as sine qua non for a valid search under section 132 of the Act - i) Whether sanction of warrant has been properly issued by competent authority or not; Whether the wa…

M/S. VENUS INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 837/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

M/S. VENUS INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 836/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

M/S. VENUS INFRABUILD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CENT.CIRCLE-1(1),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 834/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR VASWANI,, AHMEDABAD

ITA 807/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI ASHOK SUNDERDAS VASWANI, AHMEDABAD

ITA 806/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI RAJESH SUNDERDAS VASWANI, AHMEDABAD

ITA 805/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

SHRI DEEPAK BUDHARMAL VASWANI,,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 461/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

SHRI RAJESH SUNDERDAS VASWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 457/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

SHRI ASHOK SUNDERDAS VASWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 456/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed

…ssing Officer relying upon Board's Instruction and judicial pronouncements in the case of Jain & Jain V. Union of India [1982] 134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain V. Union of India [1975] 98 ITR 469 (Delhi)] and [Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) [1994] 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)] has held that there is no provision of the Act for providing copy of authorisation of warrant to the assessee. The law only requires that warrant must be produced by the authority before the commencement of the proceeding of search and the same has been done. I agree with the findings of the Assessing Officer that AO is not required to pro…

DCIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S DELTA INFRALOGISTICS WORLDWIDE LTD, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-

ITA 819/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. 4. The learned A.O. has erred in law in holding the appellant is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and 'vied to appreciate that the search proceedings u/s.132 are in aid of ultimate assessment and a statutory appe…

DCIT, MANGALORE vs. M/S DELTA INFRALOGISTICS WORLDWIDE LTD, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-

ITA 818/BANG/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. 4. The learned A.O. has erred in law in holding the appellant is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and 'vied to appreciate that the search proceedings u/s.132 are in aid of ultimate assessment and a statutory appe…

M/S DELTA INFRALOGISTICS WORLDWIDE LIMITED,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-

ITA 776/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. 4. The learned A.O. has erred in law in holding the appellant is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and 'vied to appreciate that the search proceedings u/s.132 are in aid of ultimate assessment and a statutory appe…

M/S DELTA INFRALOGISTICS WORLDWIDE LIMITED,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-

ITA 774/BANG/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. 4. The learned A.O. has erred in law in holding the appellant is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and 'vied to appreciate that the search proceedings u/s.132 are in aid of ultimate assessment and a statutory appe…

M/S DELTA INFRALOGISTICS WORLDWIDE LIMITED,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-

ITA 773/BANG/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. 4. The learned A.O. has erred in law in holding the appellant is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and 'vied to appreciate that the search proceedings u/s.132 are in aid of ultimate assessment and a statutory appe…

M/S DELTA INFRALOGISTICS WORLDWIDE LIMITED,MANGALORE vs. ACIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2008-

ITA 772/BANG/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Years

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. K. V. Aravind, Advocate
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 40

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. 4. The learned A.O. has erred in law in holding the appellant is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and 'vied to appreciate that the search proceedings u/s.132 are in aid of ultimate assessment and a statutory appe…

M/S HML AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,,MANGALORE vs. DCIT, MANGALORE

In the result, the assessee’s Cross Objections for Assessment Years 2002-

ITA 83/BANG/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jan 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Delta Infralogistics The Deputy Commissioner Of 2002-03 (Worldwide) Ltd., Income Tax, [Formerly Hml Agencies Pvt. Ltd.,] Central Circle, #202, Veekay Towers, Mangalore. Kulur Bangra Road, Kulur, Mangalore. Pan : Aaach 7083 B The Asst. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Delta Infralogistics 2003-04 Tax, (Worldwide) Ltd., Circle – 1(1), Mangalore. Mangalore. Pan : Aaach 7083 B C.O. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 9/Bang/2013 M/S. Delta Infralogistics The Deputy Commissioner 2003-04 (Worldwide) Ltd., Of Income Tax, (In Ita No.817/Bang/2012) Mangalore. Central Circle, Pan : Aaach 7083 B Mangalore. 10/Bang/2013 -Do- -Do- 2004-05 (In Ita No. 818/Bang/2012) 11/Bang/2013 -Do- -Do- 2005-06 (In Ita No.819/Bang/2012) 12/Bang/2013 -Do- -Do- 2006-07 (In Ita No.820/Bang/2012) 13/Bang/2013 -Do- -Do- 2007-08 (In Ita No.821/Bang/2012)

For Respondent: Shri. Dilip, Jr. to Sr. Standing Counsel
Section 132Section 153A

…c] of the Act to issue the warrant and the satisfaction note recorded therein under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case especially in the light of the decision of the jurisdictional high court in the case of SOUTHERN HERBALS reported in 207 ITR 55 and consequently, the assessment is bad in law and liable to be annulled. The authorities below have erred in law in holding the appellant 4. is not entitled to question the validity of the search in the course of the assessment proceedings and failed to appreciate that the search ITA No. 817/Bang/2012 C. O. Nos. 9 to 13/Bang/2013 Page 5 of 12 p…

SH. KEHAR SINGH,KARNAL vs. PCIT, KARNAL

In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1094/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: SH. K.L. ANEJA, ADVFor Respondent: SH. NAVEEN CHANDRA, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1094/Del/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12 SH. KEHAR SINGH, VS. PR. CIT, SECTOR-12, H.NO. 46, SECTOR-6, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, URBAN ESTATE, KARNAL KARNAL (PAN: CPSPS0058H) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by: SH. K.L. ANEJA, ADV. Revenue by: SH. NAVEEN CHANDRA, CIT(DR) ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 04.2.2016 passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT, Karnal relating to Assessment Year 2011-12 u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1…

Showing 1–20 of 22 · Page 1 of 2

134 ITR 655 (Bom.), V. K. Jain v. Union of India (207 ITR 55) — Cited in 22 Judgments | BharatTax