ITO v. Seth Bros. (SC)

74 ITR 836Reported decision1969#4960 most cited

What is ITO v. Seth Bros. (SC) authority for?

Evidence collected during an illegal search can still be used against the assessee. An assessment made based on such evidence is valid.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2024.

Also referred to as

ITO v. Seth Bros. · 74 ITR 836 · illegal search · evidence admissibility · search and seizure · assessment based on seized evidence · section 132 · section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 249(4)

Issues it is cited on

section 132(2)section 132(1)(a)section 153(a)(1)section 250(1)section 153a proceedingssection 158bdabatement of assessmentexplanation to section 37going concernannual letting valueprohibited by lawsection 52

Judgments citing ITO v. Seth Bros. (SC)

KAVITA GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 34(5), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6243/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godaraassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…l return filed by the assessee been adopted as the basis of accrual of income by the AO. 7.5 I draw support from two decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Pooranmal vs. Director of Inspection & Others [1974] 93 ITR 505, ITQ vs. Sheth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836. The Supreme Gold held in these cases though the search action may be illegal the evidence collected thereby was liable to be used against the person from whose custody it was seized. In the circumstances the assessment of income made by the AO is upheld and the grounds taken by the Appellant are dismissed. " 6. After hearing both the parties and…

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

…Bangalore Page 21 of 115 conduct of search the assessee relies on the following decisions:- i) DGIT Vs. Space Wood Furnishers 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 sectio…

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

…Bangalore Page 21 of 115 conduct of search the assessee relies on the following decisions:- i) DGIT Vs. Space Wood Furnishers 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 sectio…

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

…Bangalore Page 21 of 115 conduct of search the assessee relies on the following decisions:- i) DGIT Vs. Space Wood Furnishers 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 sectio…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 328/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…Dhanuka Vs Union of India (Raj) 252 ITR 205 ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 10 of 41 • Warrant of Authorization need not specify the particulars of books of accounts and documents to be unearthed in search ITO Vs Seth Bros. (SC) 74 ITR 836 • Evidence collected during an illegal search can be used against the searched party. Pooran Mal Vs Director of Inspection (Investigation) & Ors. (SC) 93 ITR 505; State of Punjab Vs Baldev Singh etc. (SC) 157 CTR 3 • Tribunal cannot go into validity or otherwise of administrative decision for conducting search & seizure when hearing an appeal ag…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 327/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…Dhanuka Vs Union of India (Raj) 252 ITR 205 ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 10 of 41 • Warrant of Authorization need not specify the particulars of books of accounts and documents to be unearthed in search ITO Vs Seth Bros. (SC) 74 ITR 836 • Evidence collected during an illegal search can be used against the searched party. Pooran Mal Vs Director of Inspection (Investigation) & Ors. (SC) 93 ITR 505; State of Punjab Vs Baldev Singh etc. (SC) 157 CTR 3 • Tribunal cannot go into validity or otherwise of administrative decision for conducting search & seizure when hearing an appeal ag…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 326/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…Dhanuka Vs Union of India (Raj) 252 ITR 205 ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 10 of 41 • Warrant of Authorization need not specify the particulars of books of accounts and documents to be unearthed in search ITO Vs Seth Bros. (SC) 74 ITR 836 • Evidence collected during an illegal search can be used against the searched party. Pooran Mal Vs Director of Inspection (Investigation) & Ors. (SC) 93 ITR 505; State of Punjab Vs Baldev Singh etc. (SC) 157 CTR 3 • Tribunal cannot go into validity or otherwise of administrative decision for conducting search & seizure when hearing an appeal ag…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 325/BANG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…Dhanuka Vs Union of India (Raj) 252 ITR 205 ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 10 of 41 • Warrant of Authorization need not specify the particulars of books of accounts and documents to be unearthed in search ITO Vs Seth Bros. (SC) 74 ITR 836 • Evidence collected during an illegal search can be used against the searched party. Pooran Mal Vs Director of Inspection (Investigation) & Ors. (SC) 93 ITR 505; State of Punjab Vs Baldev Singh etc. (SC) 157 CTR 3 • Tribunal cannot go into validity or otherwise of administrative decision for conducting search & seizure when hearing an appeal ag…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 324/BANG/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…Dhanuka Vs Union of India (Raj) 252 ITR 205 ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 10 of 41 • Warrant of Authorization need not specify the particulars of books of accounts and documents to be unearthed in search ITO Vs Seth Bros. (SC) 74 ITR 836 • Evidence collected during an illegal search can be used against the searched party. Pooran Mal Vs Director of Inspection (Investigation) & Ors. (SC) 93 ITR 505; State of Punjab Vs Baldev Singh etc. (SC) 157 CTR 3 • Tribunal cannot go into validity or otherwise of administrative decision for conducting search & seizure when hearing an appeal ag…

WILFRED D'SOUZA,MANGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALURU

In the result, ITA Nos.323 & 324/Bang/2022 are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 323/BANG/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. S. Praveena, D.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153ASection 246A

…Dhanuka Vs Union of India (Raj) 252 ITR 205 ITA Nos.323 to 328/Bang/2022 Wilfred D’Souza, Mangaluru Page 10 of 41 • Warrant of Authorization need not specify the particulars of books of accounts and documents to be unearthed in search ITO Vs Seth Bros. (SC) 74 ITR 836 • Evidence collected during an illegal search can be used against the searched party. Pooran Mal Vs Director of Inspection (Investigation) & Ors. (SC) 93 ITR 505; State of Punjab Vs Baldev Singh etc. (SC) 157 CTR 3 • Tribunal cannot go into validity or otherwise of administrative decision for conducting search & seizure when hearing an appeal ag…

PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) vs. LALJIBHAI KANJIBHAI MANDALIA

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High

C.A. No.-004081-004081 - 2022Supreme Court13 Jul 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)

…ewellery, etc. which represents partly or wholly income which has not been disclosed for the purposes of the Act. xx xx xx 21. In the light of the views expressed by this Court in ITO v. Seth Bros. [ITO v. Seth Bros., (1969) 2 SCC 324 : (1969) 74 ITR 836] 21 and Pooran Mal [Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (Investigation), (1974) 1 SCC 345 : 1974 SCC (Tax) 114 : (1974) 93 ITR 505] , the above opinion expressed by the High Court is plainly incorrect. The necessity of recording of reasons, despite the amendment of Rule 112(2) with effect from 1-10-1975, has been repeatedly…

M/S.BALAJI BULLION & COMMODITIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-40, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 1291/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Balaji Bullion & Commodities The Dy. Commissioner Of (India) Private Limited Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcbo236F Balaji Universal Tradelinks P. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd. Income–Tax, 118/120, 3Rd Floor, Ashoka Central Circle–40, Vs. House Zavri Baazar, Mumbai Mumbai-400 002

For Appellant: Shri N.M. Porwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT DR
Section 10ASection 153ASection 153BSection 37Section 68

…Balaji Universal Tradelinks P. Ltd. & Balaji Bullion & commodities (I) P. Ltd.; A.Y. 09–10 question to be examined and answered in these writ petitions. The view, we have taken finds support from the decisions of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Seth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836 and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC). Reference can also be made to the decision of this court in CITv. S. K. Katyal [2009] 308 ITR 168/177 Taxman 380 wherein the expression 'panchnama' was elucidated and explained in the following words:— "15. These provisions demonstrate that a search and seizure under the said Act h…

NIRANJAN LAL GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 34(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 6244/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaas S.M.C. (Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Mohan SinhaFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash
Section 1Section 139Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 5

…nal return filed by the assessee been adopted as the basis of accrual of income by the AO. 7.5 I draw support from two decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Pooranmal vs. Director of Inspection &Others [1974] 93 ITR 505, ITO vs. Sheth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836. The Page 5 of 10 ITA. No. 6244/Del/2018 Supreme Gold held in these cases though the search action may be illegal the evidence collected thereby was liable to be used against the person from whose custody it was seized. In the circumstances the assessment of income made by the AO is upheld and the grounds taken by the Appellant are dismissed. “…

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4513/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…importance to be given to the material seized is a matter of appraisal and merits and not a question to be examined and answered in these writ petitions. The view, we have taken finds support from the decisions of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Seth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836 and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC). Reference can also be made to the decision of this court in CITv. S. K. Katyal [2009] 308 ITR 168/177 Taxman 380 wherein the expression 'panchnama' was elucidated and explained in the following words:— "15. These provisions demonstrate that a search and seizure under the said Act ha…

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4512/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…importance to be given to the material seized is a matter of appraisal and merits and not a question to be examined and answered in these writ petitions. The view, we have taken finds support from the decisions of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Seth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836 and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC). Reference can also be made to the decision of this court in CITv. S. K. Katyal [2009] 308 ITR 168/177 Taxman 380 wherein the expression 'panchnama' was elucidated and explained in the following words:— "15. These provisions demonstrate that a search and seizure under the said Act ha…

ASST CIT CIR 2, THANE vs. SALASAR DEVELOPERS, THANE

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4511/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 132Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…importance to be given to the material seized is a matter of appraisal and merits and not a question to be examined and answered in these writ petitions. The view, we have taken finds support from the decisions of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Seth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836 and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC). Reference can also be made to the decision of this court in CITv. S. K. Katyal [2009] 308 ITR 168/177 Taxman 380 wherein the expression 'panchnama' was elucidated and explained in the following words:— "15. These provisions demonstrate that a search and seizure under the said Act ha…

BALAJI UNIVERSAL TRADELINK P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 40, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2183/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Sanjay Arora

Section 132(3)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

…importance to be given to the material seized is a matter of appraisal and merits and not a question to be examined and answered in these writ petitions. The view, we have taken finds support from the decisions of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Seth Bros. [1969] 74 ITR 836 and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC). Reference can also be made to the decision of this court in CITv. S. K. Katyal [2009] 308 ITR 168/177 Taxman 380 wherein the expression 'panchnama' was elucidated and explained in the following words:— "15. These provisions demonstrate that a search and seizure under the said Act ha…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRE III, vs. PATLIPUTRA INTERNATIONAL TRADING LTD

ITA - 351 / 2009HC Delhi30 Nov 2009
Section 132(1)Section 158B

…292B of the Act, non mentioning or incorrect mentioning of the premises to be searched in the search warrants was material illegality which could not be glossed over. The Tribunal relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in I.T.O. v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 wherein the Apex Court held that Section 132 does not confer any arbitrary power upon the Revenue authority. Search is always premises specific and assessee specific. premises to be searched are left blank or are mentioned vaguely without being specific, it would give an unguided power to the authorised officer which cannot be countenanced. The Tr…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL III vs. HARMONY PSYCHIATRY CENTRE PVT LTD

ITA - 339 / 2009HC Delhi30 Nov 2009
Section 132(1)Section 158B

…292B of the Act, non mentioning or incorrect mentioning of the premises to be searched in the search warrants was material illegality which could not be glossed over. The Tribunal relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in I.T.O. v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 wherein the Apex Court held that Section 132 does not confer any arbitrary power upon the Revenue authority. Search is always premises specific and assessee specific. premises to be searched are left blank or are mentioned vaguely without being specific, it would give an unguided power to the authorised officer which cannot be countenanced. The Tr…

COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL III vs. PROFESSIONAL LEASING & CAPITAL SERVICE LTD

ITA - 350 / 2009HC Delhi30 Nov 2009
Section 132(1)Section 158B

…292B of the Act, non mentioning or incorrect mentioning of the premises to be searched in the search warrants was material illegality which could not be glossed over. The Tribunal relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in I.T.O. v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 wherein the Apex Court held that Section 132 does not confer any arbitrary power upon the Revenue authority. Search is always premises specific and assessee specific. premises to be searched are left blank or are mentioned vaguely without being specific, it would give an unguided power to the authorised officer which cannot be countenanced. The Tr…

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2