CIT v. Kabul Chawla

380 ITR 573High Court2016#3 most cited

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.

3,235

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,837 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Kabul Chawla · Kabul Chawla · section 153A · section 132 · incriminating material · search assessment · non-abated years · scope of assessment · additions · undisclosed income

Also reported as

61 Taxmann.com 412234 Taxmann 300281 CTR 45

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 132ASection 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 158bcstatement under section 132(4)section 132asection 158bblock periodsection 132(1)section 153a(1)section 158section 153bsearch assessmentpanchnamaincriminating material

Judgments citing CIT v. Kabul Chawla

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. M/S Jay Iron and Steel Ltd

Accordingly, the same are dismissed along with pending applications

ITA/364/2022HC Delhi26 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

…. 6624/Del/2017 for AY 2011-12, ITA No. 6638/Del./2017 for AY 2011-12 and ITA No. 6623/Del./2017 for AY 2010-11. 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT has erred in relying upon the judgement of this Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del) ignoring the fact that Revenue's SLP on similar issue is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Apar Industries Ltd. This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003922 ITA Nos.358-368/2022 Page 6 of 13 3. He states that the ITAT has erred in holding that no incriminating material was found…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. M/S Jpm Tools Ltd

Accordingly, the same are dismissed along with pending applications

ITA/358/2022HC Delhi26 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

…. 6624/Del/2017 for AY 2011-12, ITA No. 6638/Del./2017 for AY 2011-12 and ITA No. 6623/Del./2017 for AY 2010-11. 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the ITAT has erred in relying upon the judgement of this Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del) ignoring the fact that Revenue's SLP on similar issue is pending adjudication before the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Apar Industries Ltd. This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003917 ITA Nos.358-368/2022 Page 6 of 13 3. He states that the ITAT has erred in holding that no incriminating material was found…

M/S Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 870/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

M/S Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 30/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Hassan Hajee & Co, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1363/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Hassan Hajee & Co, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1362/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Hassan Hajee & Co, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1361/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Hassan Hajee & Co, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1360/BANG/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Hassan Hajee & Co, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1359/BANG/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Asst.C.I.T., Mangalore vs. M/S Hassan Hajee & Co, Mangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1358/BANG/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Sept 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Praveen Karanth, D.R

…rbed without there being any basis for doing so which is impermissible in law. Even in case of a searched person, the same reason would hold good…………………..” 19.4 The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) had summarized the legal position as regards assessment u/s 153A of the Act, as follows:- IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 6/PNJ/2015, ITA Nos.1358 to 1363/Bang/2015, ITA No.30/Bang/2017 & ITA No.870/Bang/2017 M/s. Hassan Hajee & Co., Mangalore Page 54 of 58 "37. On a conspectus of Section. 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in th…

Jyoti Goel, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3144/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: The Search. In The Assessment After The Search U/S 153A, Ao Made Certain Additions, One Of Them Was Addition U/S 68 Of Rs.12,00,000/-. In The Assessment Order, Ao

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Ranu Mukherjee, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 68

…e the source thereof, satisfactory explanation was not received, hence the addition was made by the AO. Assessee made preliminary objections before the ld. CIT (A) relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.) that since the assessment was completed before the search and no incriminating material was found during the search relating to this addition, hence addition is not sustainable. But the ld. CIT (A) rejected the assessee’s plea that no incriminating material was found as he observed that the bank statement was found and in the said bank a…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. Gautam Bhalla

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/311/2022HC Delhi07 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 68

…a (supra), we hold that no addition u/s 68 of the Act is warranted. 15. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.” 4. Further, the conclusion reached in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573 was summarized in PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia, (2017) 82 taxmann.com 287 Del. The relevant portion of the judgment passed in Meeta Gutgutia (supra) is reproduced hereinbelow:- "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position th…

Shri Mukesh Agarwal, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3093/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3093/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. Mr.Mukesh Agarwal, The Dy. Commissioner- No.127A, Brickline Road, Flat 3181, Of Income Tax, Tvh Kumbini Square, 18Th Floor, Central Circle-3(2), 3Rd Block, Purasawalkam, Chennai. Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aafpk 6968 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.S.Sridhar, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Guru Bashyam, CIT
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ramed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act unless, the addition is supported by incriminating material found during the course of search, if such assessment is unabated/concluded as on the date of search. In the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawala reported in 380 ITR 573, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that although section 153A does not say that addition should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course of the search or other post search material or information available with the Assessing Officer which can be related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment can be…

ACIT Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Nirmal Minda, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 685/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasadacit Vs. Nirmal Minda Central Circle – 13, A-15, Ashok Vihar New Delhi Phase-1, New Delhi – 110 052 Pan No. Afypm 4910 J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Shailesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Rinku Singh, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 30.08.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.08.2022 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.06.2020 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT Vs. Nirmal Minda Central Circle – 13, A-15, Ashok Vihar New Delhi Phase-1, New Delhi – 110 052 PAN No. AFYPM 4910 J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Shailesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Rinku Singh, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing: 30.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 31.08.2022 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 17.06.2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi re…

DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Klaxon Trading (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Cross Objection No

ITA 3269/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “C” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.3268 & 3269/Del./2018 Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 M/s. Klaxon Trading Pvt. The DCIT, Central Ltd., # Warehouse A-97B, Circle-28, Room Khasra No.50/4, Behind vs. No.317, ARA Centre, Friends Dharam Kanta, Shahbad Daulatpur, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi – 110 042. New Delhi. PAN AAACK3487E (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.60/Del./2021 Arising out of ITA.No.3268/Del./2018 - Assessment Year 2010-2011 M/s. Klaxon Trading Pvt. The DCIT, Centra…

DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Klaxon Trading (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Cross Objection No

ITA 3268/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh GargFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “C” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.3268 & 3269/Del./2018 Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 M/s. Klaxon Trading Pvt. The DCIT, Central Ltd., # Warehouse A-97B, Circle-28, Room Khasra No.50/4, Behind vs. No.317, ARA Centre, Friends Dharam Kanta, Shahbad Daulatpur, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi – 110 042. New Delhi. PAN AAACK3487E (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.60/Del./2021 Arising out of ITA.No.3268/Del./2018 - Assessment Year 2010-2011 M/s. Klaxon Trading Pvt. The DCIT, Centra…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central 3 Delhi vs. Alchemist Capital Ltd

Appeal is dismissed

ITA-289/2022HC Delhi30 Aug 2022
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)

…May, 2015, which is a lead case tagged with more than 115 cases on the issue of restriction of addition only to incriminating material found during search. 4. This Court finds that the conclusion reached in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Kabul Chawla, (2016) 380 ITR 573 was summarized in PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia, (2017) 82 taxmann.com 287 Del. The relevant portion of the Judgment passed in PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (supra) is reproduced hereinbelow:- "37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal po…

Kamla Landmarc Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

ITA 1073/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. Nos.1072, 1071, 1070, 4469, 4471 & 1073/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15) Kamla Landmarc Properties बनाम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aahfk1108L (अपीलधथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुिवधईकीतधरीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोर्णधकीतधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 23.04.2019 For A.Y. 2008-09 To A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y. 2012-13 To A.Y. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant ModiFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…as to vest the AO with the necessary powers to make additions to the total income in relation to assessments which did not abate on account of search. Considering these aspects the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del) held as under:- “37. On a conspectus of section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: Once a search takes place under section 132 of the Act, notice under section 153A(1) will have to be mandatorily issued to th…

Kamla Landmarc Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

ITA 1072/MUM/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. Nos.1072, 1071, 1070, 4469, 4471 & 1073/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15) Kamla Landmarc Properties बनाम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aahfk1108L (अपीलधथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुिवधईकीतधरीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोर्णधकीतधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 23.04.2019 For A.Y. 2008-09 To A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y. 2012-13 To A.Y. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant ModiFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…as to vest the AO with the necessary powers to make additions to the total income in relation to assessments which did not abate on account of search. Considering these aspects the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del) held as under:- “37. On a conspectus of section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: Once a search takes place under section 132 of the Act, notice under section 153A(1) will have to be mandatorily issued to th…

Kamla Landmarc Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AYs 2008-09,

ITA 1071/MUM/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकरअपीलसं/ I.T.A. Nos.1072, 1071, 1070, 4469, 4471 & 1073/Mum/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years:2008-09 To 2010-11 & 2012-13 To 2014-15) Kamla Landmarc Properties बनाम/ Dcit, Central Circle-3(4) Ground Floor, Shanti Vimal, P. 19Th Floor, Air India Vs. M. Road, Vile Parle East, Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400057. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aahfk1108L (अपीलधथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rashmikant Modi Ms. Ketki Rajeshirke Revenue By: Shri Vinay Sinha (Dr) सुिवधईकीतधरीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोर्णधकीतधरीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench These Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Are Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai [Hereinafter In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 23.04.2019 For A.Y. 2008-09 To A.Y. 2010-11 & A.Y. 2012-13 To A.Y. 2014-15. Since Issues Involved Are Common, All The Appeals For All The Assessment Year/Years (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ay”) Were Heard Together. Both The Parties Also Argued Them Together Raising Similar Arguments On These Issues. Accordingly, For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity, We Dispose All The Appeals By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Rashmikant ModiFor Respondent: Shri Vinay Sinha (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…as to vest the AO with the necessary powers to make additions to the total income in relation to assessments which did not abate on account of search. Considering these aspects the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs Kabul Chawla reported in (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del) held as under:- “37. On a conspectus of section 153A(1) of the Act, read with the provisos thereto, and in the light of the law explained in the aforementioned decisions, the legal position that emerges is as under: Once a search takes place under section 132 of the Act, notice under section 153A(1) will have to be mandatorily issued to th…