Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia

395 ITR 526High Court2017#35 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia authority for?

In search assessments under Section 153A, additions to income are permissible only if incriminating material is found during the search; in the absence of such material, completed assessments cannot be disturbed. A statement recorded under Section 132(4) and later retracted may not, on its own, constitute sufficient incriminating evidence for making additions.

1,226

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia · 395 ITR 526 · search assessment · Section 153A · Section 132(4) · incriminating material · retracted statement · completed assessments · additions without incriminating evidence · Kabul Chawla principle

Also reported as

82 Taxmann.com 287248 Taxmann 384157 DTR 20

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 132(4)Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153(1)statement under section 132(4)retracted statementsection 132(1)section 153a(1)section 153bpanchnamasection 132asearch assessmentblock periodsection 158bsection 158

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia

Dolex Commercial Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Cent-Cir 8(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1618/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

Dolex Commercial Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Cent-Cir 8(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1598/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

Dolex Commercial Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent Circale 8(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1597/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

Dolex Commercial Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT. Cent. Cir. 8(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1596/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

Dolex Commercial Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent Cir 8(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for A

ITA 1595/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Arun Khodpia ()

Section 144Section 153ASection 37(1)Section 40aSection 68

…tral-3 Vs Abhisar Buildwel Pvt Ltd and the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-III Vs. Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) & Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -2, New Delhi Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Delhi) and the decision of Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Thane Vs. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (2015) 374 ITR 645 (Bombay). 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the rejection of books of accounts of t…

Hiteshi Leasing and Housing Pvt Ltd, New Delho vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Faridabad

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

ITA 4620/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarhiteshi Leasing & Housing Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle 1, Yogi Associates, Faridabad. E – 335, East Of Kailash, New Delhi – 110 005. (Pan : Aaach8298J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Pushpdeep Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Order : 15.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Gurgaon-3 [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 04.081.2024 For Assessment Year 2011-12 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “(A) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Assessing Officer & Cit(A), While Passing The Order Erred In: A. Passing The Assessment Order Dated 26.03.2015 U/S 153A Despite The Fact The Assessee Was Not Searched & The Assessee Was Issued Notice Under Section 153C On 29.1 1.2013. This Is A Jurisdictional Error

For Appellant: Shri Pushpdeep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 131Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…nd during search, alone can be considered as ‘incriminating material’. 12. In regard to this controversy, we find that the learned Spl. counsel for the Department has relied the ratio of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, in the case of Dayawanti v. CIT (2017)390 ITR 496, to argue that once the seized material gives rise to ‘belief’ in the mind of the assessing officer, then that is sufficient to consider the ‘seized material’ to be ‘incriminating material’ and that CIT(A) was wrong in the approach having presuppositions that unless a document carries a stamp of incrimination on its forehead, its contents need no…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Sapna Karnani, Tonk Phatak

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 712/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…there was no incriminating material or facts and circumstances justifying the addition of Rs.17,19,14,701/-.” 26 ITA Nos.709/JP/2025 DCIT vs. Sapna Karnani iii.The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns 'N' Petals [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) : 152 DTR 153 (Del) held “that it is only if during the course of search under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous years is found that the invocation of section 153A qua each of the assessment years would be justified. If no incriminating material was found during the course of se…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Sapna Karnani, Tonk Phatak

ITA 711/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…hat head. Clearly, there was no incriminating material or facts and circumstances justifying the addition of Rs.17,19,14,701/- .” DCIT vs. Sapna Karnani iii. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) : 152 DTR 153 (Del) held “that it is only if during the course of search under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous years is found that the invocation of section 153A qua each of the assessment years would be justified. If no incriminating material was found during the course of se…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Sapna Karnani, Tonk Phatak

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 710/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…here was no incriminating material or facts and circumstances justifying the addition of Rs.17,19,14,701/- ” 26 ITA Nos.709/JP/2025 DCIT vs. Sapna Karnani iii.The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns 'N' Petals [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) : 152 DTR 153 (Del) held “that it is only if during the course of search under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous years is found that the invocation of section 153A qua each of the assessment years would be justified. If no incriminating material was found during the course of se…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Sapna Karnani, Tonk Phatak

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 709/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT, DR
Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69C

…, there was no incriminating material or facts and circumstances justifying the addition of Rs.17,19,14,701/-.26 ITA Nos.709/JP/2025 DCIT vs. Sapna Karnani iii.The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns 'N' Petals [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) : 152 DTR 153 (Del) held “that it is only if during the course of search under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous years is found that the invocation of section 153A qua each of the assessment years would be justified. If no incriminating material was found during the course of se…

Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Cen. Cir-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 513/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 234B

…ction 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other material existing or brought on the record of the AO. (v) Pr. CIT vs MEETA GUTGUTIA Prop. M/s FERNS “N” PETALS (2017) 395 ITR 526 (DELHI) ; 152 DTR 153 (DELHI) (Confirmed by the Supreme Court of India) Under section 153A of the Act, assessment has to be made in relation to the search or requisition, namely, in relation to material disclosed during the search or requisition. If in relation to any assessment year, no incriminating material is found, no addition or disallowanc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Karnani Solvex Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 480/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, CAFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT
Section 127Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 68

…he additions made under that head. Clearly, there was no incriminating material or facts and circumstances justifying the addition of Rs.17,19,14,701/- ” iii. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Meeta Gutgutia Prop. Ferns ‘N’ Petals [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Del) : 152 DTR 153 (Del) held “that it is only if during the course of search under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening of the assessments for six previous years is found that the invocation of section 153A qua each of the assessment years would be justified. If no incriminating material was found during the course of se…

DCIT CC-8(2), Mumbai vs. Rakesh S Kathotia, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 4295/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 132Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 250

…ent order finalised on 29.12.2000 relating to Section 80HHC deduction 21 Rakesh Kothotia, Mumbai. and consequently the C.I.T. could not have invoked jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act." The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 395 ITR 526 after referring to decision in the case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla [2015] 281 CTR 45 held that no addition can be made in absence of incriminating material having been unearthed during the course of Search proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in [2018] 257 Taxman 441 (SC) dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue against the aforesa…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Adam Smith Consultancy Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

ITA 2248/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 245

…material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. 4.3.6 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526(Delhi) held that invocation of section 153A by revenue for assessment years 2000-01 to 2003-04 was without any legal basis where there was no incriminating material qua each of those assessment years. The operative part of judgment is reproduced below: "69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the "habitual concealing of income a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. M/S Snw Smith Consultants Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

ITA 2245/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 245

…material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. 4.3.6 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526(Delhi) held that invocation of section 153A by revenue for assessment years 2000-01 to 2003-04 was without any legal basis where there was no incriminating material qua each of those assessment years. The operative part of judgment is reproduced below: "69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the "habitual concealing of income a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Snw Smith Consultants Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

ITA 2244/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 245

…material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. 4.3.6 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526(Delhi) held that invocation of section 153A by revenue for assessment years 2000-01 to 2003-04 was without any legal basis where there was no incriminating material qua each of those assessment years. The operative part of judgment is reproduced below: "69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the "habitual concealing of income a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. M/S Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue being ITA

ITA 2243/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 245

…material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. 4.3.6 Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526(Delhi) held that invocation of section 153A by revenue for assessment years 2000-01 to 2003-04 was without any legal basis where there was no incriminating material qua each of those assessment years. The operative part of judgment is reproduced below: "69. What weighed with the Court in the above decision was the "habitual concealing of income a…

Vikas Dugar L/H of Late Shri Keshari Singh Dugar, Jaipur vs. PCIT (Central) Jaipur, Jaipur

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

ITA 388/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 263

…Jaipur. Section 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. 18. Similarly, in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2 Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Del.), The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, held that : “47. What the AO did, as was noted by the CIT(A), was to proceed on the basis as if there should have been such undisclosed franchisee income in the earlier AYs as well because the modus operandi of the Assessee during those was the same. The AO also presumed that the number of outlets remained c…

Vikas Dugar L/H of Late Shri Keshari Singh Dugar, Jaipur vs. PCIT (Central), Jaipur

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

ITA 387/JPR/2025[A.Y.2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 263

…Jaipur. Section 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. 18. Similarly, in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2 Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Del.), The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, held that : “47. What the AO did, as was noted by the CIT(A), was to proceed on the basis as if there should have been such undisclosed franchisee income in the earlier AYs as well because the modus operandi of the Assessee during those was the same. The AO also presumed that the number of outlets remained c…

Vikas Dugar Legal Heir of Late Shri Keshari Singh Dugar, Jaipur vs. PCIT (Central), Jaipur

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

ITA 386/JPR/2025[A.Y. 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 263

…Jaipur. Section 153 A is relatable to abated proceedings (i.e. those pending on the date of search) and the word 'reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. 18. Similarly, in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2 Vs. Meeta Gutgutia (2017) 395 ITR 526 (Del.), The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, held that : “47. What the AO did, as was noted by the CIT(A), was to proceed on the basis as if there should have been such undisclosed franchisee income in the earlier AYs as well because the modus operandi of the Assessee during those was the same. The AO also presumed that the number of outlets remained c…