Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain

384 ITR 543High Court2016#555 most cited

What is Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain authority for?

In a search assessment under Section 153A, no additions can be made for assessment years where assessments have already been concluded, unless incriminating material related to undisclosed income for those years is found during the search operation.

174

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain · Section 153A · Section 132 · search assessment · incriminating material · concluded assessment · undisclosed income · addition under section 68 · bogus long term capital gain · no incriminating material found

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 131Section 139(1)Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

annual letting valueannual valuepermanent account numberbogus long term capital gainsection 22section 127section 132aentry operatorregular assessmentaddition under section 68search assessmentaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing Pr.CIT v. Lata Jain

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 711/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…dents including of the honourable jurisdictional High Court in CIT versus continental warehouse Corporation (2015) 374 ITR 645, Murli Agro products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 and of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and lata Jain 384 ITR 543 as well as several other judicial precedents laying the same principle. 026. The learned departmental representative vehemently opposed argument of the assessee and stated that ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani a) there was a balance sheet, which was found duri…

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 710/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…dents including of the honourable jurisdictional High Court in CIT versus continental warehouse Corporation (2015) 374 ITR 645, Murli Agro products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 and of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and lata Jain 384 ITR 543 as well as several other judicial precedents laying the same principle. 026. The learned departmental representative vehemently opposed argument of the assessee and stated that ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani a) there was a balance sheet, which was found duri…

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 709/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…dents including of the honourable jurisdictional High Court in CIT versus continental warehouse Corporation (2015) 374 ITR 645, Murli Agro products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 and of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and lata Jain 384 ITR 543 as well as several other judicial precedents laying the same principle. 026. The learned departmental representative vehemently opposed argument of the assessee and stated that ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani a) there was a balance sheet, which was found duri…

Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

ITA 2089/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Akhade CIT DR
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143Section 153A

…dents including of the honourable jurisdictional High Court in CIT versus continental warehouse Corporation (2015) 374 ITR 645, Murli Agro products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 and of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and lata Jain 384 ITR 543 as well as several other judicial precedents laying the same principle. 026. The learned departmental representative vehemently opposed argument of the assessee and stated that ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani a) there was a balance sheet, which was found duri…

ACIT, Central Circle-2, New Delhi vs. R.V.Buildtech & Amusement P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4889/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2013-14 Acit, Vs. R.V. Buildtech & Central Circle-2 Amusement P. Ltd., Room No. 363 Sector-10, Metro Walk, 3Rd Floor, E-2, Near Rithala Metro Station, Ara Centre, Rohini, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi- 110 085 New Delhi – 110 055 Pan Aafcr87733B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…ions in support of the above proposition. We may refer the following:- (i) Kabul Chawla vs. ACIT (2014) 50 taxmann.com 238 (Delhi-Trib) affirmed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del) (ii) Pr. CIT vs. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Del) (iii) Pr. CIT v. Vikas Gutgutia (2017) 396 ITR 691 (Del) 8 Pr. CIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 248 Taxman 384 (Del) (SLP dismissed in PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2018) 257 Taxman 441 (SC)) (v) PCIT vs. Ramesh Bhai Jivraj Desai (2020) 275 Taxman 522 (Guj) (vi) Smt. Jami Nirmala vs. PR. CIT (2021) 437 ITR 573 (Orissa) (vii) PCIT vs. Jaypee Financ…

Priya Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

ITA 719/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ourse of search is invalid. He relied up on plethora of judicial precedents :- i. CIT V Continental Warehousing Corporation [ 2015] 374 ITR 645 [BOM] ii. Murli Agro Products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 [ Bom] iii. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 [Delhi] iv. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 [ Delhi] v. Regency Mahavir Properties 89 Taxman.com 444 {ITAT} {Mum} vi. Jitendra J Mehta 104 taxmann.com 449 [SC] 020. Even on the merits of the addition, he submitted that assessee is owner of three properties out of which two properties were self-occupied. The remaining premises remained vacant and same were held for letting out or sale an…

Priya Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

ITA 717/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ourse of search is invalid. He relied up on plethora of judicial precedents :- i. CIT V Continental Warehousing Corporation [ 2015] 374 ITR 645 [BOM] ii. Murli Agro Products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 [ Bom] iii. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 [Delhi] iv. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 [ Delhi] v. Regency Mahavir Properties 89 Taxman.com 444 {ITAT} {Mum} vi. Jitendra J Mehta 104 taxmann.com 449 [SC] 020. Even on the merits of the addition, he submitted that assessee is owner of three properties out of which two properties were self-occupied. The remaining premises remained vacant and same were held for letting out or sale an…

Priya Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Cy CIT-CC-5(2), Mumbai

ITA 716/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ourse of search is invalid. He relied up on plethora of judicial precedents :- i. CIT V Continental Warehousing Corporation [ 2015] 374 ITR 645 [BOM] ii. Murli Agro Products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 [ Bom] iii. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 [Delhi] iv. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 [ Delhi] v. Regency Mahavir Properties 89 Taxman.com 444 {ITAT} {Mum} vi. Jitendra J Mehta 104 taxmann.com 449 [SC] 020. Even on the merits of the addition, he submitted that assessee is owner of three properties out of which two properties were self-occupied. The remaining premises remained vacant and same were held for letting out or sale an…

Priya Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

ITA 715/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ourse of search is invalid. He relied up on plethora of judicial precedents :- i. CIT V Continental Warehousing Corporation [ 2015] 374 ITR 645 [BOM] ii. Murli Agro Products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 [ Bom] iii. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 [Delhi] iv. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 [ Delhi] v. Regency Mahavir Properties 89 Taxman.com 444 {ITAT} {Mum} vi. Jitendra J Mehta 104 taxmann.com 449 [SC] 020. Even on the merits of the addition, he submitted that assessee is owner of three properties out of which two properties were self-occupied. The remaining premises remained vacant and same were held for letting out or sale an…

Priya Mohan Gurnanai, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

ITA 708/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ourse of search is invalid. He relied up on plethora of judicial precedents :- i. CIT V Continental Warehousing Corporation [ 2015] 374 ITR 645 [BOM] ii. Murli Agro Products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 [ Bom] iii. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 [Delhi] iv. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 [ Delhi] v. Regency Mahavir Properties 89 Taxman.com 444 {ITAT} {Mum} vi. Jitendra J Mehta 104 taxmann.com 449 [SC] 020. Even on the merits of the addition, he submitted that assessee is owner of three properties out of which two properties were self-occupied. The remaining premises remained vacant and same were held for letting out or sale an…

Priya Mohan Gurnanai, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-5(2), Mumbai

ITA 707/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…ourse of search is invalid. He relied up on plethora of judicial precedents :- i. CIT V Continental Warehousing Corporation [ 2015] 374 ITR 645 [BOM] ii. Murli Agro Products Ltd 49 taxmann.com 172 [ Bom] iii. Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 [Delhi] iv. Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 [ Delhi] v. Regency Mahavir Properties 89 Taxman.com 444 {ITAT} {Mum} vi. Jitendra J Mehta 104 taxmann.com 449 [SC] 020. Even on the merits of the addition, he submitted that assessee is owner of three properties out of which two properties were self-occupied. The remaining premises remained vacant and same were held for letting out or sale an…

ACIT Central -2, Bhopal vs. Shri Naresh Tharani, Bhopal

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed and COs of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 113/IND/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No.108/Ind/2021 & Acit Central-2 Shri Naresh Tharani Bhopal E-2/149, Arera Colony Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aampt6514G

Section 153C

…thout any incriminating material is beyond the scope of proceedings u/s 153C. He has relied upon the various decisions as under: 1.CIT vs Continental Warehousing Corporation 58 taxmann.com 78 (Bom.) 2.CIT vs Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 (Del.) 3.CIT vs Lata Jain 384 ITR 543 (Del.) 4.Gahoi Dal Mills 117 Taxmann.com 117 MP 117 (SC) 5.Abhisar Buildwell P Ltd. [2017] 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC) 4.1. Ld. AR has further submitted that the assesse is in the business of brokerage of real estate transaction and working as an agent between buyers and sellers of properties. In this line of business normally commission charges ar…

Asstt. Commissioner of Incomet Ax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal, Nagpur

Accordingly directed to delete the addition of Rs.1,80,00,000/-. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 are accordingly allowed

ITA 61/NAG/2018[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Sept 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.Nos.60 & 61/NAG./2018 Assessment Years 2009-2010 & 2010-2011 Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar The ACIT, Agrawal, Flat No.101, Om Central Circle-1(1), Mansion, Plot No.158, Room No.205, 2nd Floor, vs. Ramdaspeth, Nagpur. Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur. PIN – 440 012 PIN – 440 001. PAN AEDPA0105K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR For Assessee : Shri Mukesh Agr…

Asstt.Comissioenr of Income Tax Central Circle -1(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar Agrawal, Nagpur

Accordingly directed to delete the addition of Rs.1,80,00,000/-. Ground Nos. 1 and 2 are accordingly allowed

ITA 60/NAG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Gd Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Agrawal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : PUNE BENCHES : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.Nos.60 & 61/NAG./2018 Assessment Years 2009-2010 & 2010-2011 Shri Sanjay Gaurishankar The ACIT, Agrawal, Flat No.101, Om Central Circle-1(1), Mansion, Plot No.158, Room No.205, 2nd Floor, vs. Ramdaspeth, Nagpur. Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur. PIN – 440 012 PIN – 440 001. PAN AEDPA0105K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Kailash Kanojiya, Sr. DR For Assessee : Shri Mukesh Agr…

Deputy Commissiner of Income Tax, Lic Building vs. M/S Gee Vee Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 267/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLEH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

…imal Kumar Rathi (2020) 115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search under section 132 and only income related to incriminating documents found during search can be considered in assessment – CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal (2017) 86 taxmann.com 3/251 Taxman 22 (Bom.) (iv) There being no incriminating m…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S Vision Estates Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 266/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLEH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

…imal Kumar Rathi (2020) 115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search under section 132 and only income related to incriminating documents found during search can be considered in assessment – CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal (2017) 86 taxmann.com 3/251 Taxman 22 (Bom.) (iv) There being no incriminating m…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S Chokhi Dhani Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 265/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLEH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

…imal Kumar Rathi (2020) 115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search under section 132 and only income related to incriminating documents found during search can be considered in assessment – CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal (2017) 86 taxmann.com 3/251 Taxman 22 (Bom.) (iv) There being no incriminating m…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. M/S Rigid Conductors (Raj.) Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 264/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLEH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

…imal Kumar Rathi (2020) 115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search under section 132 and only income related to incriminating documents found during search can be considered in assessment – CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal (2017) 86 taxmann.com 3/251 Taxman 22 (Bom.) (iv) There being no incriminating m…

ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rishabraj Infra Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3246/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleita Nos. 3246/Mum/2022 (A.Y: 2015-16) Acit, C.Circle -2(1), Vs. Rishabraj Infrapvtltd., Old Cgo Bldg, 804, 212, 2Nd Floor, B Wing, 8Th Floor, M.K. Road, Bldg No. 3, Hari Om Mumbai – 400020. Plaza, Mg Road, Boravali (E), Mumbai-400066. Pan/Gir No. : Aadcv2975P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Riddhi Mishra.Dr Revenue By : Mr.Karan Jain.Ar Date Of Hearing 18.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai Passed U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Ms.Riddhi Mishra.DRFor Respondent: Mr.Karan Jain.AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

….) Ltd. [2016] 385 ITR 346/69 taxmann.com 108 (kar); the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in ITA Nos. 3246Mum/2022 M/s Rishabraj Infra Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. Pr. CIT vSalasar Stock Broking Ltd. [GA No. 1929 of 2016, dated 24-8- 2016], Principal CIT. Ms. Lata Jain [2016] 384 ITR 543 (Delhi)In Meeta Gutgutia (supra) the entire gamut of the case law had been analysed and the legal position was reiterated that unless there is incriminating material qua each of the AYs in which additions are sought to be made, pursuant to search and seizure operation, the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153A of the Act would be vitiated…

Moraj Building Concepts Pvt Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 420/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…d by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Continental Warehouse Corporation (2015) 374 ITR 645, Murli Agro Products Ltd., [49 taxmann.com 172 (Bom)] and of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573 and Ms. Lata Jain [384 ITR 543]. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and supported their findings. 6. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that there is no doubt that the assessment year 2012-13 and 2013-14 are unabated and we gone through the various notices issued by the Assessing Officer to asses…