What is CIT v. Kabul Chawla authority for?

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Kabul Chawla?

3,235 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Kabul Chawla come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153A, Section 132, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 153C.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573)

Pradeep Kumar Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

Appeals are partly allowed and all the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 8289/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 8286 To 8291/Del/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16) बनाम Pradeep Kumar Jindal Acit F-3/12, Model Town, New Central Circle-25, New Delhi / Vs. Delhi, Delhi, Pin 110009. "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaipj8526A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 9095, 4946, 9096 & 4947/Del/2019, (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17) बनाम Acit M/S. Delta Leasing & Central Circle-25, New Finance Ltd. / Vs. Delhi C-55 F.I.E., Patparganj, East Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi - 110092 "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaacd0594K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Yadav, CIT. DR

Section 132(4)

…l ground raised. We have noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessment framed in the present case u/s.153A of the Act is in accordance with the law interpreted by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573(Delhi), noting that incriminating material was found in the present case by way of the admission of the assessee itself of being an accommodation entry provider which was duly corroborated with evidences also ITA Nos. 8286/Del/2018 & 13 Ors. [Pradeep Kumar Jindal & Ors.] - 6 – found during search conducted on him. Therefore, as far as validity of…

Pradeep Kumar Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

Appeals are partly allowed and all the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 8288/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 8286 To 8291/Del/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16) बनाम Pradeep Kumar Jindal Acit F-3/12, Model Town, New Central Circle-25, New Delhi / Vs. Delhi, Delhi, Pin 110009. "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaipj8526A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 9095, 4946, 9096 & 4947/Del/2019, (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17) बनाम Acit M/S. Delta Leasing & Central Circle-25, New Finance Ltd. / Vs. Delhi C-55 F.I.E., Patparganj, East Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi - 110092 "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaacd0594K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Yadav, CIT. DR

Section 132(4)

…l ground raised. We have noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessment framed in the present case u/s.153A of the Act is in accordance with the law interpreted by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573(Delhi), noting that incriminating material was found in the present case by way of the admission of the assessee itself of being an accommodation entry provider which was duly corroborated with evidences also ITA Nos. 8286/Del/2018 & 13 Ors. [Pradeep Kumar Jindal & Ors.] - 6 – found during search conducted on him. Therefore, as far as validity of…

Pradeep Kumar Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

Appeals are partly allowed and all the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 8287/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 8286 To 8291/Del/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16) बनाम Pradeep Kumar Jindal Acit F-3/12, Model Town, New Central Circle-25, New Delhi / Vs. Delhi, Delhi, Pin 110009. "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaipj8526A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 9095, 4946, 9096 & 4947/Del/2019, (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17) बनाम Acit M/S. Delta Leasing & Central Circle-25, New Finance Ltd. / Vs. Delhi C-55 F.I.E., Patparganj, East Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi - 110092 "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaacd0594K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Yadav, CIT. DR

Section 132(4)

…l ground raised. We have noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessment framed in the present case u/s.153A of the Act is in accordance with the law interpreted by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573(Delhi), noting that incriminating material was found in the present case by way of the admission of the assessee itself of being an accommodation entry provider which was duly corroborated with evidences also ITA Nos. 8286/Del/2018 & 13 Ors. [Pradeep Kumar Jindal & Ors.] - 6 – found during search conducted on him. Therefore, as far as validity of…

Pradeep Kumar Jindal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 25, New Delhi

Appeals are partly allowed and all the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 8286/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 8286 To 8291/Del/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2015-16) बनाम Pradeep Kumar Jindal Acit F-3/12, Model Town, New Central Circle-25, New Delhi / Vs. Delhi, Delhi, Pin 110009. "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaipj8526A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 9095, 4946, 9096 & 4947/Del/2019, (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2016-17) बनाम Acit M/S. Delta Leasing & Central Circle-25, New Finance Ltd. / Vs. Delhi C-55 F.I.E., Patparganj, East Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi - 110092 "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan No. : Aaacd0594K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Yadav, CIT. DR

Section 132(4)

…l ground raised. We have noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessment framed in the present case u/s.153A of the Act is in accordance with the law interpreted by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573(Delhi), noting that incriminating material was found in the present case by way of the admission of the assessee itself of being an accommodation entry provider which was duly corroborated with evidences also ITA Nos. 8286/Del/2018 & 13 Ors. [Pradeep Kumar Jindal & Ors.] - 6 – found during search conducted on him. Therefore, as far as validity of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Joginder Singh, Haryana

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2479/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 69A

…rving that it is regular bank account duly disclosed in the return of income filed and therefore could not be held as incriminating material and by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawala reported in 380 ITR 573 has deleted the additions. 14. Heard both the parties. In this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. dated 24.04.2023 has settled this issue by holding that where no incriminating material were found as a result of search with respect non abated years, no addition could be…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhandewalan New Delhi vs. Sh. Joginder Singh, Haryana

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 2478/DEL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 69A

…rving that it is regular bank account duly disclosed in the return of income filed and therefore could not be held as incriminating material and by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawala reported in 380 ITR 573 has deleted the additions. 14. Heard both the parties. In this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. dated 24.04.2023 has settled this issue by holding that where no incriminating material were found as a result of search with respect non abated years, no addition could be…

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Harjeet Singh, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1684/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 69A

…rving that it is regular bank account duly disclosed in the return of income filed and therefore could not be held as incriminating material and by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawala reported in 380 ITR 573 has deleted the additions. 14. Heard both the parties. In this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. dated 24.04.2023 has settled this issue by holding that where no incriminating material were found as a result of search with respect non abated years, no addition could be…

DCIT, CC-31, New Delhi vs. Harjeet Singh, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 1683/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.1684/Del/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dy. Cit, Shri Harjeet Singh Central Circle-31, House No.22, Mandkola Teh. New Delhi. Vs. Hathin, Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No.153/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.153/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2013-14 C.O. No.154/Del/2022 Arising Out Of Ita No.154/Del/2021 Assessment Year 2014-15 Shri Harjeet Singh Dy. Cit, House No.22, Central Circle-31, Mandkola Teh. Hathin, Vs. New Delhi. Faridabad Haryana-121001. Pan: Bpips2997Q (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

Section 250Section 69A

…rving that it is regular bank account duly disclosed in the return of income filed and therefore could not be held as incriminating material and by relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawala reported in 380 ITR 573 has deleted the additions. 14. Heard both the parties. In this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. dated 24.04.2023 has settled this issue by holding that where no incriminating material were found as a result of search with respect non abated years, no addition could be…

Praveen Kumar G Jain, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(2)000, Chennai

In the result the appeals of the assessee for both the A

ITA 2730/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:2729 & 2730/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2015-16 Praveen Kumar G Jain, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.52, Near Select Theatre, Vs. Central Circle -3(2), Nattupillaiyar Koil Street, Chennai – 600 034. Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. [Pan:Aeapp-4675-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 132Section 153ASection 24

…ating material unearthed during the course of search. 11. In the above pretext a critical issue for consideration is whether the assessment for AY 2015–16 was “pending” as on the date of the search. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla [(2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del)], followed in Abhisar Buildwell (supra), held that an assessment is treated as pending only if: a. A return had been filed and the time for issuance of notice u/s.143(2) had not expired; b. A notice u/s.142(1) of the Act had already been issued; or c. Reassessment proceedings u/s.147 had been initiated and were ongoing. 12. In the present…

Praveen Kumar G Jain, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(2), Chennai

In the result the appeals of the assessee for both the A

ITA 2729/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:2729 & 2730/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2015-16 Praveen Kumar G Jain, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.52, Near Select Theatre, Vs. Central Circle -3(2), Nattupillaiyar Koil Street, Chennai – 600 034. Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. [Pan:Aeapp-4675-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT

Section 132Section 153ASection 24

…ating material unearthed during the course of search. 11. In the above pretext a critical issue for consideration is whether the assessment for AY 2015–16 was “pending” as on the date of the search. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla [(2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del)], followed in Abhisar Buildwell (supra), held that an assessment is treated as pending only if: a. A return had been filed and the time for issuance of notice u/s.143(2) had not expired; b. A notice u/s.142(1) of the Act had already been issued; or c. Reassessment proceedings u/s.147 had been initiated and were ongoing. 12. In the present…

Robin Ramavtar Goenka, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue IT[SS]A Nos

ITA 434/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 69C

…earch action carried out in the case of the assessee concerned. Reliance is placed on following decisions:  PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd.–(2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC);  PCIT vs. Saumya Construction – (2017) 387 ITR 529 (Guj);  CIT vs. Kabul Chawla – (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del.);  Priyablue Shipping P. Ltd. – IT(SS)A 40-41/Ahd/2022;  PCIT - Kutch Salt & Allies Ind Ltd. – TA 283 of 2023 (Guj)  PCIT vs. Backbone Projects Ltd. – TA88& 205 of 2023 (Guj) 22.2. Thus Ld CIT(A) has rightly held given a factual finding that none of the additions in the captioned appeals are based on any incriminating material found dur…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neelam Arya, Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1533/DEL/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandradcit, Central Circle -25, Vs. Neelam Arya Room No. 317, 3Rd Floor, 7, Neelanchal, Bandh E-2, Ara Centre, Road,Chandanhulla, Jhandewalan Extension Chattarpur, New Delhi – 110055 Delhi – 110074 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adtpa6583A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. &

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69B

…In support of same plethora of judgments were relied upon by the assessee which is reproduced as under: a) PCIT vs Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd. (SC) reported in 454 ITR 212 b) Judgment of the High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 573. c) Judgment of High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs Jaypee Financial Services Ltd. reported in 280 Taxman 147. d) Judgment of the High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT Meeta Gutgutia reported in 395 ITR 526. P a g e | 5 Neelam Arya (AY: 2010-11) e) Judgment of the Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs Singhad Technical Education…