CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P.) Ltd.

385 ITR 346High Court2016#198 most cited

What is CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P.) Ltd. authority for?

A statement made by an assessee under Section 131 during search proceedings, without any corroborating incriminating material found during the search, cannot solely constitute incriminating evidence for making additions in assessments under Section 153A or 153C.

371

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park · IBC Knowledge Park · 385 ITR 346 · section 153A · section 153C · section 131 statement · incriminating material · search assessment · additions without evidence · completed assessments · undisclosed income

Also reported as

69 Taxmann.com 108287 CTR 261

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 131Section 132ASection 69
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 158bdsection 153a proceedingssection 158b(b)section 158bb(1)section 158bbsection 153(a)jdasection 153c(1)documents seizedsection 158bsection 158section 153a(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P.) Ltd.

Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1212/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…connection it was submitted that in respect of non-pending non-abated assessments, any addition can be made only on the basis of incriminating material in an assessment u/s 153A of the Act relying on the following decisions:- CIT Vs IBC Knowledge Park P. Ltd 385 ITR 346 (Kar) ACIT Vs Cornerstone Properties Pvt Ltd (ITA No. 1714 to l 717/Bang/2013) CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573( Delhi) ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 8 of 73 16. The ld. AR further submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing Development Company Vs DCIT 274 CTR 122 (Karn) relied on by the CIT(A) is not…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1211/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…connection it was submitted that in respect of non-pending non-abated assessments, any addition can be made only on the basis of incriminating material in an assessment u/s 153A of the Act relying on the following decisions:- CIT Vs IBC Knowledge Park P. Ltd 385 ITR 346 (Kar) ACIT Vs Cornerstone Properties Pvt Ltd (ITA No. 1714 to l 717/Bang/2013) CIT Vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573( Delhi) ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 8 of 73 16. The ld. AR further submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Canara Housing Development Company Vs DCIT 274 CTR 122 (Karn) relied on by the CIT(A) is not…

Matrix India Entertainment Consultants Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC -8(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals for 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 &

ITA 2938/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ramlal Negi

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, D.R
Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 271(1)(c)

…08 of the paper book. In view of these facts, the notice issued u/s 153C of the Act and consequent assessment order is bad in law. In defense of his arguments, the ld AR relied heavily on the following decisions: i) CIT vs. IBC Knowledge Park Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 385 ITR 346 (Kar.)(HC) ii) CIT vs. Veerprabhu Marketing Ltd. (2016) 388 ITR 574 (Cal.)(HC) iii) Pr CIT v. Smt. Lakshmi Singh [2017] 78 taxmann.com 207 (Kar.)(HC) iv) Smt. Sunita Bai [2017] 78 taxmann.com 274 (Kar.)(HC) v) CIT v Sinhgad Technical Education Society [2015] 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) The Bombay High Court decision is confirmed by the Supreme Court in C…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Everglades, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 347/BANG/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Everglades, Of Income Tax, No.1146, 12Th Main, 1St Cross, Central Circle - 2(3), Hal 2Nd Stage, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560038. Pan : Aaaae 2295 E Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Respondent By : Shri. Balachandran & Shri. Shiva Prasad Reddy, Advocates Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevanthe Facts & Circumstances Under Which This Appeal By The Revenue Is Listed For Hearing Before The Tribunal Is As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), BengaluruFor Respondent: Shri. Balachandran and Shri. Shiva Prasad Reddy, Advocates
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2007-08 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/s. Everglades, of Income Tax, No.1146, 12th Main, 1st Cross, Central Circle - 2(3), HAL 2nd Stage, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560038. PAN : AAAAE 2295 E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Respondent by : Shri. Balachandran and Shri. Shiva Prasad Reddy, Advocates Date of hearing : 19.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2021 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President T…

Smt. Sulochana Ramesh, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1810/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 140ASection 144Section 153CSection 234ASection 249

…and consequently, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s.153C of the Act, is bad in law for the assessment year under appeal having regard to the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK P. LTD., reported in 385 ITR 346 [Kar]. ITA No.1809 & 1810/Bang/2019 Page 3 of 4 5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the completion of the assessment u/s.144 of the Act under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, in as much as, the appellant's husband was appearing before the learned A.O. only to submit and…

Smt. Sulochana Ramesh, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1809/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 140ASection 144Section 153CSection 234ASection 249

…and consequently, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s.153C of the Act, is bad in law for the assessment year under appeal having regard to the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK P. LTD., reported in 385 ITR 346 [Kar]. ITA No.1809 & 1810/Bang/2019 Page 3 of 4 5. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the completion of the assessment u/s.144 of the Act under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, in as much as, the appellant's husband was appearing before the learned A.O. only to submit and…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Ibc Knowledge Park Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 327/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.Ramsubramaniyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153C

…the assessee filed appeals before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, challenging the decisions so rendered by the Tribunal for assessment years 2004-2005 to 2006-2007. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in its decision dated 28.04.2016, reported in (2016) 385 ITR 346, held that it is necessary that the satisfaction recorded by the AO should mention that the incriminating material found during the course of search showed undisclosed income of another assessee. In the absence of specific observation about the existence of undisclosed income in the satisfaction note 3 ITA No.326-327 CO 73-74/Bang/2018 M/s.IBC K…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Ibc Knowledge Park Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 326/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.S.Ramsubramaniyam, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Muzaffar Hussain, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153C

…the assessee filed appeals before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, challenging the decisions so rendered by the Tribunal for assessment years 2004-2005 to 2006-2007. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in its decision dated 28.04.2016, reported in (2016) 385 ITR 346, held that it is necessary that the satisfaction recorded by the AO should mention that the incriminating material found during the course of search showed undisclosed income of another assessee. In the absence of specific observation about the existence of undisclosed income in the satisfaction note 3 ITA No.326-327 CO 73-74/Bang/2018 M/s.IBC K…

Sri H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 512/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Sri M.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 511/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1939/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1938/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1937/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1936/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1935/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.H.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1934/BANG/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.M.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1933/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.M.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1932/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.M.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1931/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…

Shri.M.J.Siwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1930/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandra Sekhar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…that the AO should have initiated proceedings u/s 153C of the Act. He submitted that the provisions of sec.153A and 153C operate on different persons, which have been explained by Hon’ble jurisdictional Karnataka High Court in the case of IBC Knowledge Park (385 ITR 346)(Kar) at paragraph 49 of its order, which reads as under:- 49. On a conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions, it becomes clear that a search can take place only when a concerned officer has information and reason to believe that any person is in possession of any valuable assets, which has not been or would not be disclosed under the Act. In…