Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd.

387 ITR 529High Court2016#83 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd. authority for?

Assessments under Section 153A cannot be sustained without any incriminating material found during the search that substantiates the additions. This principle applies even to completed assessments where no additional income is disclosed.

670

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions · Section 153A · search assessment · incriminating material · completed assessment · no addition without evidence · Section 132 · Section 153C

Also reported as

81 Taxmann.com 2922016 SCC OnLine GUJ 9976

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Sambalpur, Income Tax Department vs. Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Rourkela

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 305/CTK/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2013-14 Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of Vs. Rajendra Rajendra Prasad Prasad Gupta, Gupta, Income Tax, Central Cir Income Tax, Central Circle, 1/15, 1/15, Civil Civil Township, Township, Sambalpur Rourkela-769004 769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Abdpg 9284 G (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By Assessee By : Shri Firoze Andhyarujina, Nikhil Jangid & Sudarshan Firoze Andhyarujina, Nikhil Jangid & Sudarshan Padhi, Advs Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/9/202 24 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/9/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Firoze Andhyarujina, Nikhil Jangid and SudarshanFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

…’ble Supreme Court to submit that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case P a g e 2 | 14 Assessment Year : 2013-14 of Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Del) as also the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction, 387 ITR 529 (Guj) and the decisions of other Hon’ble High Courts taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessment in the absence of any incriminating materials. He further submitted that the conditions mentioned in para 14 of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court were also not complied and, therefore, as no incriminating ma…