PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain

432 ITR 384High Court2021#535 most cited

What is PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain authority for?

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) from a third party, lacking corroborative evidence, does not constitute sufficient incriminating material to assume jurisdiction or make additions in an assessment under Section 153A or 153C.

180

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain · Section 153C · Section 153A · Section 132(4) statement · third-party statement · corroborative evidence · incriminating material · search assessment · accommodation entries · jurisdiction 153C

Also reported as

2021 SCC OnLine DEL 317499 Taxmann.com 426

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 132(4)Section 132Section 68Section 143(2)Section 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 158bb(1)section 158b(b)section 10(26)retraction of statementsection 158bbstatement under section 132(4)section 127(2)section 153(a)section 158bcretracted statementsection 132(4)section 158

Judgments citing PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam vs. Arun Raj Pillai, Pathanamthitta

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 180/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 10(26)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…s required to be determined is whether the statement given by third party constitutes an incriminating material as envisaged u/s. 153A of the Act. The issue stands settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384(Delhi) and PCIT vs. Manoj Hora 402 ITR 175 (Delhi) and in the case of PCIT v. Kunvarji Commodities Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 432 ITR 180 (Guj). The 10 ITA 178 to 182 & CO No. 4/Coch/2024 Arun Raj.Pillai relevant paragraphs of the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court are extracted below: - “10 Now, coming to the aspect, viz., the invocation of secti…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam vs. Arun Raj Pillai, Pathanamthitta

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 179/COCH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 10(26)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…s required to be determined is whether the statement given by third party constitutes an incriminating material as envisaged u/s. 153A of the Act. The issue stands settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384(Delhi) and PCIT vs. Manoj Hora 402 ITR 175 (Delhi) and in the case of PCIT v. Kunvarji Commodities Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 432 ITR 180 (Guj). The 10 ITA 178 to 182 & CO No. 4/Coch/2024 Arun Raj.Pillai relevant paragraphs of the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court are extracted below: - “10 Now, coming to the aspect, viz., the invocation of secti…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam vs. Arun Raj Pillai, Pathanamthitta

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the cross objection of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 178/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 10(26)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…s required to be determined is whether the statement given by third party constitutes an incriminating material as envisaged u/s. 153A of the Act. The issue stands settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT v. Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384(Delhi) and PCIT vs. Manoj Hora 402 ITR 175 (Delhi) and in the case of PCIT v. Kunvarji Commodities Brokers Pvt. Ltd. 432 ITR 180 (Guj). The 10 ITA 178 to 182 & CO No. 4/Coch/2024 Arun Raj.Pillai relevant paragraphs of the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court are extracted below: - “10 Now, coming to the aspect, viz., the invocation of secti…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam vs. Valsala Raj, Pathanamthitta

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 177/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 10(26)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JM ITA Nos. 175 & 177/Coch/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2012-13 DCIT, Central Circle Valsala Raj Aayakar Bhavan, Karbala Rajavalsam, Panangadu, Kulanada vs. Junction, Kollam 691001 Pandalam, Pathanamthitta 680503 [PAN: ACAPR8941B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 09.06.2025 O R D E R Per Bench Theseare appeals filed by the Revenue directed against the orders of the Comm…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kollam vs. Valsala Raj, Pathanamthitta

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 175/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 10(26)Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JM ITA Nos. 175 & 177/Coch/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2012-13 DCIT, Central Circle Valsala Raj Aayakar Bhavan, Karbala Rajavalsam, Panangadu, Kulanada vs. Junction, Kollam 691001 Pandalam, Pathanamthitta 680503 [PAN: ACAPR8941B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 21.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 09.06.2025 O R D E R Per Bench Theseare appeals filed by the Revenue directed against the orders of the Comm…

V.K.M Feeds Private Limited, Tamilnadu vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Thrissur

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

ITA 939/COCH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year : 2017-18 Vkm Feeds Private Limited, Acit, Central Circle, 2, Reservoir Street, Thrissur Venkatesa Colony, Vs. Pollachi-642001 Tamil Nadu Pan : Aafcv2454D (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shaji Paulose, Ca For Revenue : Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr (Heard In Hybrid Bench) Date Of Hearing : 25-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025

For Appellant: Shri Shaji Paulose, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153CSection 250Section 68

…tements alone, without any other material discovered during the search which would corroborate said statements, do not grant the AO the authority to make an assessment.” 8. In another judgment, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) [432 ITR 384 ], interalia held as under:- "10. Now, coming to the aspeci, viz., the invocation of section 153A on the basis of the statement recorded in search action against a third person, we may note that the Assessing Officer has used this statement on oath recorded in the course of search conducted in the case of a third party (i. e., search of Pradeep…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

ITA 1465/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डा0 एस. सीथललक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड कमलेश जयंतभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1463 to 1465/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Kailash Chand Maheshwari 223 Kirti Nagar, Near Kamal and Company Tonk Road, Jaipur बनाम Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-02, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर.सं./PAN/GIR No.: AKQPM5593A अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रतियोधी/Respondent निर्णयार्थी की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri S. L.…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralcircle-2, Jaipur

ITA 1464/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR डॉ. एस. सीतलक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1463 to 1465/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Kailash Chand Maheshwari 223 Kirti Nagar, Near Kamal and Company Tonk Road, Jaipur बनाम Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-02, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.: AKQPM5593A अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रEstosi / Respondent निर्णयार्थी की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

ITA 1463/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 144Section 153ASection 57Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1463 to 1465/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 cuke Kailash Chand Maheshwari DCIT, Vs. 223 Kirti Nagar, Near Kamal and Central Circle-02, Company Tonk Road, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AKQPM5593A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S. L.…

DCIT CC-8(4), Mumbai vs. Aachman Vanijya Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 827/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah & Ms. Tisha Bagh, A/RsFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ed material. Obviously; an assessment has to be made under this section only on the basis of the seized material." (emphasis, italicised in print, supplied)” 11. In another judgment, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) [432 ITR 384], interalia held as under:- “10. Now, coming to the aspeci, viz., the invocation of section 153A on the basis of the statement recorded in search action against a third person, we may note that the Assessing Officer has used this statement on oath recorded in the course of search conducted in the case of a third party (i. e., search of Pradeep Ku…

DCIT Central Circle 8(4), Mumbai vs. Aachman Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 826/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah & Ms. Tisha Bagh, A/RsFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ed material. Obviously; an assessment has to be made under this section only on the basis of the seized material." (emphasis, italicised in print, supplied)” 11. In another judgment, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) [432 ITR 384], interalia held as under:- “10. Now, coming to the aspeci, viz., the invocation of section 153A on the basis of the statement recorded in search action against a third person, we may note that the Assessing Officer has used this statement on oath recorded in the course of search conducted in the case of a third party (i. e., search of Pradeep Ku…

DCIT, Central Circle 8(4), Mumbai vs. Aachman Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 825/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah & Ms. Tisha Bagh, A/RsFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ed material. Obviously; an assessment has to be made under this section only on the basis of the seized material." (emphasis, italicised in print, supplied)” 11. In another judgment, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) [432 ITR 384], interalia held as under:- “10. Now, coming to the aspeci, viz., the invocation of section 153A on the basis of the statement recorded in search action against a third person, we may note that the Assessing Officer has used this statement on oath recorded in the course of search conducted in the case of a third party (i. e., search of Pradeep Ku…

DCIT Central Circle-8(4), Mumbai vs. Aachman Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the revenue and cross-objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 824/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah & Ms. Tisha Bagh, A/RsFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 153ASection 68

…ed material. Obviously; an assessment has to be made under this section only on the basis of the seized material." (emphasis, italicised in print, supplied)” 11. In another judgment, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) [432 ITR 384], interalia held as under:- “10. Now, coming to the aspeci, viz., the invocation of section 153A on the basis of the statement recorded in search action against a third person, we may note that the Assessing Officer has used this statement on oath recorded in the course of search conducted in the case of a third party (i. e., search of Pradeep Ku…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6499/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6498/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6497/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6496/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6495/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6494/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…

Bipin Dahyalal Savla, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 6493/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Byomakesh Pradipta Kumar Panda, CIR/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69

…criminating material. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. DR are distinguishable from applicability of provision of section 153C of the Act. 11. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs Anand Kumar Jain 432 ITR 384 (Delhi) wherein held that if no incriminating material is found during search in the case of assessee then no addition could be made on the basis of search action conducted in the case of third party and under such circumstances, it is mandatory to make assessment u/s 153C of the Act. We have also perused the various judicial pronouncements in th…