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.

How many judgments cite Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd.?

670 judgments on BharatTax cite Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd. (387 ITR 529), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 153A, Section 132, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 153C.

Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd. (387 ITR 529)

Gujarat Land Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 267/MUM/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Tarang Mehta & Aarati Thakkar, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT, D/R

Section 132Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

…arch.” I.T.A. No. 267/Mum/2025 5 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has approved the interpretations given by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573)(Delhi) and by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Constructions (387 ITR 529)(Guj.). The relevant observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme are extracted below:- “7.1 In the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), the Delhi High Court, while considering the very issue and on interpretation of section 153A of the Act, 1961, has summarised the legal position as under: Summary of the legal position 38. On a conspectus of section 153A…

Annapurna Infratech, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

ITA 252/MUM/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Tarang MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…d as a result of search.” 9.8 The scope of assessments to be framed u/s 153A/153C of the Act has been explained by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573)(Delhi) and by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction (387 ITR 529)(Guj). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has approved the interpretations given by the Hon'ble Delhi and Gujarat High Court in the above said cases. The relevant observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court are extracted below:- 7.1 In the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), the Delhi High Court, while considering the very issue and on interpretation of section…

Sanskar Nagar, Jhansi vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur

Appeals stands allowed

ITA 346/AGR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.351/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.352/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.353/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.354/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 5. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.349/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19; Smc Bench) & 6. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.346/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17; Smc Bench) & 7. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.347/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17; Smc Bench) & 8. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.348/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18; Smc Bench) & 9. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.350/Agr/2024

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 271D

…ng the course of search. The Ld. AR also referred to the decision of Ahmadabad Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Real Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (ITSS No.128-133/Ahd/2021) which relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Curt in the case of Soumya Construction (387 ITR 529) and quashed assessment u/s 153A on the ground that there was no seized material in the case of the assessee. The Ld. AR stated that the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court has overruled the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raj Kumar Arora (367 ITR 517) as cited by lower authorities. 1.5 The Ld. AR also drew attention to…

Imtiaz Farooqi, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 149/HYD/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…well P. Ltd. (supra). While in complete agreement with the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, (2015) 61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Saumya Construction (2016) 387 ITR 529 and the decisions of the other Hon'ble High Courts taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of the completed assessments in absence of any incriminating material, Hon’ble Apex Court concluded that- i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment und…

Imtiaz Farooqi, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

ITA 148/HYD/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P.Murali Mohana Rao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, Sr.DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

…well P. Ltd. (supra). While in complete agreement with the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, (2015) 61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Saumya Construction (2016) 387 ITR 529 and the decisions of the other Hon'ble High Courts taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of the completed assessments in absence of any incriminating material, Hon’ble Apex Court concluded that- i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment und…

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr vs. Rohit Karan Jain

ITA/5/2023HC Gauhati12 Mar 2025

Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153A

…ssioner of Income Tax, Central III CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla, [2015] 61 taxmann.com 412/234 Taxman 300/ [2016] 380 ITR 573 (Delhi) as well as by Gujarat High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. Saumya Construction (P.) Ltd. [2017] 81 taxmann.com 292/[2016] 387 ITR 529 (Guj.) has held as under: “8. For the reasons stated hereinbelow, we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and the Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction (supra), taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessment in absenc…

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 552/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, CIT

Section 153ASection 250Section 56

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"न IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज" के, उपा"य" एवं "ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 548 to 552/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 PAN: AHOPM-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Ms.T.M.Suganthama…

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 551/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, CIT

Section 153ASection 250Section 56

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"न IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज" के, उपा"य" एवं "ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 548 to 552/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 PAN: AHOPM-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Ms.T.M.Suganthama…

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Chennai

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 549/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, CIT

Section 153ASection 250Section 56

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"न IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज" के, उपा"य" एवं "ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 548 to 552/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 PAN: AHOPM-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Ms.T.M.Suganthama…

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 548/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, CIT

Section 153ASection 250Section 56

…अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"न IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" जॉज" के, उपा"य" एवं "ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 548 to 552/CHNY/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 PAN: AHOPM-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Ms.T.M.Suganthama…

Annapurna Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 6961/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2015-16 - A.Y. 2016-17 - A.Y. 2017-18 - A.Y. 2018-19 - A.Y. 2019-20 - A.Y. 2020-21 - A.Y. 2021-22 Annapurna Properties, Vs Dcit, Central Circle-1, Shop No.6, Room No.10, 6Th Floor, Rachana Chg Ltd, Ashar It Park, Opp. Joggers Park, Wagle Industrial Estate, Behind Laxminarayan Temple, Thane (W) Borivali West, Maharashtra Mumbai Pan : Aapfa1330G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT- DR &

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

…as a result of search.” 9.8. The scope of assessments to be framed u/s 153A/153C of the Act has been explained by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573)(Delhi) and by Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction (387 ITR 529)(Guj). The Hon‟ble Supreme Court has approved the interpretations given by the Hon‟ble Delhi and Gujarat High Court in the above said cases. The relevant observations made by Hon‟ble Supreme Court are extracted below:- 7.1 In the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), the Delhi High Court, while considering the very issue and on interpretation of section…

Annapurna Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for the AYs

ITA 6957/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee- A.Y. 2015-16 - A.Y. 2016-17 - A.Y. 2017-18 - A.Y. 2018-19 - A.Y. 2019-20 - A.Y. 2020-21 - A.Y. 2021-22 Annapurna Properties, Vs Dcit, Central Circle-1, Shop No.6, Room No.10, 6Th Floor, Rachana Chg Ltd, Ashar It Park, Opp. Joggers Park, Wagle Industrial Estate, Behind Laxminarayan Temple, Thane (W) Borivali West, Maharashtra Mumbai Pan : Aapfa1330G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash, CIT- DR &

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 68

…as a result of search.” 9.8. The scope of assessments to be framed u/s 153A/153C of the Act has been explained by Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573)(Delhi) and by Hon‟ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction (387 ITR 529)(Guj). The Hon‟ble Supreme Court has approved the interpretations given by the Hon‟ble Delhi and Gujarat High Court in the above said cases. The relevant observations made by Hon‟ble Supreme Court are extracted below:- 7.1 In the case of Kabul Chawla (supra), the Delhi High Court, while considering the very issue and on interpretation of section…

Annapurna Buildcon Infra Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

ITA 6830/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…s a result of search.” 9. 8. The scope of assessments to be framed u/s 153A/153C of the Act has been explained by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573)(Delhi) and by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction (387 ITR 529)(Guj). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has approved the interpretations given by the Hon'ble Delhi and Gujarat High Court in the above said cases. The relevant observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court are extracted below:- “in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the AO would assume jur…

ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi vs. Kuber Securities, New Delhi

ITA 4213/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member

…ement with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla [CITv. Kabul Chawla, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 11555 : (2016) 380 ITR 573] and the Gujarat High Court in Saumya Construction (P) [CIT v. Saumya Construction (P) Ltd., 2016 SCC OnLineGuj 9976 : (2016) 387 ITR 529] , taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessment in absence of any incriminating material. 29. While considering the issue involved, one has to consider the object and purpose of insertion of Section 153-A in the 1961 Act and when there shall be a block assessment under Section 153-A of the 1961 Act. 30. That pri…

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

In the result, ITA Nos.695 to 702/Chny/2023 stands dismissed

ITA 700/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.699/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.700/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.701/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 8. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.702/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit Shri C. Vijayabaskar बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1) #14/28-1, Sowrastra Street, Chennai. Illupur, Pudukottai-622 102. Vs.

For Appellant: S/Shri Nithyaesh Natraj, Vaibav R. VenkateshFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Srinivas (Sr. Standing Counsel for department)- Ld. Sr. Counsel

Section 143(3)

…and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs. Approving the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawal (380 ITR 573) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Saumya Construction (P.) Ltd. (387 ITR 529), it was held that in respect of completed assessments / unabated assessments, no addition could be made by Assessing Officer in the absence of any incriminating material found during course of search under section 132 or requisition made under section 132A. Similar is the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental W…

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

In the result, ITA Nos.695 to 702/Chny/2023 stands dismissed

ITA 697/CHNY/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.695/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.696/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.697/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.698/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 5. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.699/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 6. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.700/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 7. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.701/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 8. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.702/Chny/2023 (िनधा(रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit Shri C. Vijayabaskar बनाम/ Central Circle-2(1) #14/28-1, Sowrastra Street, Chennai. Illupur, Pudukottai-622 102. Vs.

For Appellant: S/Shri Nithyaesh Natraj, Vaibav R. VenkateshFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Srinivas (Sr. Standing Counsel for department)- Ld. Sr. Counsel

Section 143(3)

…and review petition preferred by the Revenue are hereby dismissed. No costs. Approving the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawal (380 ITR 573) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Saumya Construction (P.) Ltd. (387 ITR 529), it was held that in respect of completed assessments / unabated assessments, no addition could be made by Assessing Officer in the absence of any incriminating material found during course of search under section 132 or requisition made under section 132A. Similar is the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continental W…

ITO, Ward- 6(4), New Delhi vs. Creative Techno Solutions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4265/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member

…ement with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla [CITv. Kabul Chawla, 2015 SCC OnLine Del 11555 : (2016) 380 ITR 573] and the Gujarat High Court in Saumya Construction (P) [CIT v. Saumya Construction (P) Ltd., 2016 SCC OnLineGuj 9976 : (2016) 387 ITR 529] , taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of completed assessment in absence of any incriminating material. 29. While considering the issue involved, one has to consider the object and purpose of insertion of Section 153-A in the 1961 Act and when there shall be a block assessment under Section 153-A of the 1961 Act. 30. That pri…

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2), Hyderbad vs. Sew Infrastucture Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 1723/HYD/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: CA MV Prasad AndFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 801A(4)Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “A” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.1721, 1722, 1723/Hyd/2017 Assessment Years 2013-2014, 2014-2015 & 2015-2016 | The DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), 6th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. Telangana. (Appellant) | vs. | M/s. SEW Infrastructure Limited, 6-3-871, Snehalata, Greenlands Road, Begumpet, Hyderabad. Telangana. PAN AADCS4061P (Respondent) ITA.No.1416/Hyd./2019 Assessment Year 2016-2017 The DCIT, Circle-3(1), Room No.714, 7th Floor, Singature Towers, Opp. Botanic…

DCIT, Central Cir-2(4), Chennai vs. D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai

In the result, ITA Nos.3340 & 3341 /Chny/2018 stand allowed whereas ITA No

ITA 90/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3340/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3341/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri D.R. Balakrishna Raja Acit बनाम/ 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T.Nagar, Central Circle-3(3), Vs. Chennai-600 014. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Agwpd-2354-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.90/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit Shri D.R.Balakrishna Raja, बनाम/ Central Circle-2(4), 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T.Nagar Vs. Chennai-600 014. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Agwpd-2354-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri A. Sasikumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-02-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-02-2025

For Appellant: Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar (CIT)-Ld. DR

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 68

…accordingly dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no costs. Approving the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Saumya Construction (P.) Ltd. (387 ITR 529), it was held that in respect of completed assessments / unabated assessments, no addition could be made by Assessing Officer in the absence of any incriminating material found during course of search under section 132 or requisition made under section 132A. 5. Similar is the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continenta…

D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result, ITA Nos.3340 & 3341 /Chny/2018 stand allowed whereas ITA No

ITA 3341/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3340/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3341/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri D.R. Balakrishna Raja Acit बनाम/ 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T.Nagar, Central Circle-3(3), Vs. Chennai-600 014. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Agwpd-2354-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.90/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit Shri D.R.Balakrishna Raja, बनाम/ Central Circle-2(4), 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T.Nagar Vs. Chennai-600 014. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Agwpd-2354-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri A. Sasikumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-02-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-02-2025

For Appellant: Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar (CIT)-Ld. DR

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 68

…accordingly dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no costs. Approving the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Saumya Construction (P.) Ltd. (387 ITR 529), it was held that in respect of completed assessments / unabated assessments, no addition could be made by Assessing Officer in the absence of any incriminating material found during course of search under section 132 or requisition made under section 132A. 5. Similar is the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Continenta…

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

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

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

Gujarat Land Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

Annapurna Infratech, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

Sanskar Nagar, Jhansi vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur

Imtiaz Farooqi, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

Imtiaz Farooqi, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr vs. Rohit Karan Jain

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Chennai

Mohanraj, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

Annapurna Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

Annapurna Properties, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

Annapurna Buildcon Infra Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

ACIT, Central Circle- 30, New Delhi vs. Kuber Securities, New Delhi

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chenai vs. C.Vijaya Baskar, Pudukottai

ITO, Ward- 6(4), New Delhi vs. Creative Techno Solutions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(2), Hyderbad vs. Sew Infrastucture Limited, Hyderabad

DCIT, Central Cir-2(4), Chennai vs. D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai

D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai