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)

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 3340/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

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…

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 3328/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.3327/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3328/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Late Smt. B. Devahie Acit (Represented By Dr. Balakrishna Central Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Raja – Legal Representative) Chennai. Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Ahupb-6579-N (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 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

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…

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 3327/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3327/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3328/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Late Smt. B. Devahie Acit (Represented By Dr. Balakrishna Central Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Raja – Legal Representative) Chennai. Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Ahupb-6579-N (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 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

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…

Sankalp in, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result Revenue’s Ground Nos

ITA 577/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 69C

…aterial found in the course of search in the case of the appellant was established by AO related to the alleged additions. It is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in case of CIT Vs. Saumya Construction Pvt Ltd reported in 387 ITR 529 has considered the decisions given by various Courts and held as under:- I.T.A Nos. 45 to 48/Ahd/2022 & Ors. A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2019-20 Page No 24 ACIT Vs. Sankalp IN 12. Ld Senior Counsel Sri. Thusar Hemani submitted that the Asst. Years 2015-16 and 2016-17 are unabated assessment years, as is evident from the following undisputed dates: Date of…

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. Sankalp in, Ahmedabad

In the result Revenue's Ground Nos

ITA 568/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, Judicial Member\nAnd\nShri NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 69C

…aterial found in the course of search in the case of the appellant was established by AO related to the alleged additions. It is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in case of CIT Vs. Saumya Construction Pvt Ltd reported in 387 ITR 529 has considered the decisions given by various Courts and held as under:- 12. Ld Senior Counsel Sri. Thusar Hemani submitted that the Asst. Years 2015-16 and 2016-17 are unabated assessment years, as is evident from the following undisputed dates: Asst Years Date of "original ITR” "Last date" for issuing "notice u/s 143(2)" Date of "search" u/s 13…

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Guwahati vs. Brahmaputra Finlease Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the cross- objection filed by the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 110/GTY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Rakesh Mishra, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Malhotra, FCAFor Respondent: Soumendu Sekhar Das, JCIT

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250Section 68

…Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Abhisar Buildwell P.Ltd. [CA No. 6580 of 2021] dated 24.04.2023 upholds the ratio of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s ruling in Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573] and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s ruling in Saumya Construction [2016] 387 ITR 529] that for completed or unabated assessments, the Revenue has no jurisdiction under section 153A / 153C in the absence of any ‘incriminating material’ found during a search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A. 21. Thus, it is clear that, assessment or reassessment of income of an assessee is not possible in absence of any incrimina…

The Modern Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 432/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…ied out in the case of “assessee concerned”. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: + CIT v Singhad Technical Education Society – 397 ITR 344 (SC); + PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. – (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC); + PCIT vs. Saumya Construction – (2017) 387 ITR 529 (Guj); + CIT vs. Kabul Chawla – (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del.); • As regards reference to “statements recorded during search”, it is well settled that “statements recorded by revenue do not constitute incriminating material”. Reliance is placed on following decisions: • PCIT v Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd – 397 ITR 82 (Delhi); + PCIT v. Anand…

The United Builders Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 3465/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…ied out in the case of “assessee concerned”. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: + CIT v Singhad Technical Education Society – 397 ITR 344 (SC); + PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. – (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC); + PCIT vs. Saumya Construction – (2017) 387 ITR 529 (Guj); + CIT vs. Kabul Chawla – (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del.); • As regards reference to “statements recorded during search”, it is well settled that “statements recorded by revenue do not constitute incriminating material”. Reliance is placed on following decisions: PCIT v Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd – 397 ITR 82 (Delhi); + PCIT v. Anand Ku…

Modern Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 3464/AHD/2016[2013-14 (Q-4)]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2025

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…ied out in the case of “assessee concerned”. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: + CIT v Singhad Technical Education Society – 397 ITR 344 (SC); + PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. – (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC); + PCIT vs. Saumya Construction – (2017) 387 ITR 529 (Guj); + CIT vs. Kabul Chawla – (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del.); • As regards reference to “statements recorded during search”, it is well settled that “statements recorded by revenue do not constitute incriminating material”. Reliance is placed on following decisions: • PCIT v Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd – 397 ITR 82 (Delhi); + PCIT v. Anand…

Partistha Commercial Centre Private Limited, Delhi vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi

ITA 4264/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

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…

Vijay Maneklal Bhansali, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-19(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1773/MUM/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivram / Shri Shashi Bekal,ARsFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Agarwal (Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 151Section 153CSection 68

…erred to the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd., 149 taxmann.com 399 (SC), Amar Jewellers vs. ACIT, 137 taxmann.com 249 (Guj.), CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, 380 ITR 573 (Delhi), PCIT vs. Saumya Construction Pvt. Ltd., 387 ITR 529 (Guj.), Shyamsundar Khandelwal vs. ACIT, 161 taxmann.com 255 (Raj.) etc. The Hon’ble Court held that it was unable to concur that provisions of sections 139, 147, 148, 149 and 153 are overridden merely on account of assets, books of account, documents and materials being seized or requisitioned which either belong to or contain information regard…

DCIT, Ghaziabad vs. M/S. Devidayal Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad

ITA 4297/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 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…

Vgu-Technology Business Incubator Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption Jaipur, Jaipur

28. In view of the above finding, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) confirming the impugned assessment framed by the Assessing Officer is hereby set aside

ITA 799/JPR/2024[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jan 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: MS. Alka Gautam, CIT

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 148Section 148ASection 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 68

…ized or requisitioned belonging or relatable to the person other than on whom search was conducted s. 153C is to be resorted to-Notice under s. 148 is therefore liable to be quashed" 1.2.3 Principal CIT vs. Saumya Construction (2017) 297 CTR (Guj) 387: (2016) 387 ITR 529 (Guj) 5 Kavita Samtani vs DCIT 1.2.4 In the case of Dy. CIT vs. Smt. Shivali Mahajan & Ors. (ITA No. 5585/Del/2015), the Tribunal was considering whether books of accounts, money, bullion, jewellery found during the course of search relates to other person than the searched person, can be considered or not while making assessment under s. 153A…

Technodot Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Gandhinagar vs. The DCIT, Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad

Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 93/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokari.T(Ss).A. Nos.147&148/Ahd/2019 (A.Ys.: 2005-06 & 2006-07) Smt. Neelu Sanjay Gupta, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of L/H. Of Late Shri Sanjay Gupta Income Tax, B-202, Dhananjay Tower, Central Circle-2(2), Anand Nagar Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380015 [Pan No.Adypg0351K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T(Ss).A. Nos.21 To 23/Ahd/2020 & 15/Ahd/2022 & Ita No. 93/Ahd/2020) (A.Ys.: 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2006-07 & 2010-11 To 2011-12) M/S. Technodot Engineers Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of C/O. Cambay Hotel & Resorts, Income Tax, Plot No. 22, 23, 24 Gidc, Central Circle-2(2), Sector-25, Gandhinagar-382010 Ahmedabad [Pan No.Aabct5392A] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri ParimalFor Respondent: Shri R. N. Dsouza, CIT-DR & Shri Rignesh K

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271(1)(b)

…3A of the Act must be based solely on "incriminating material" found during the search of the concerned assessee. Reliance was placed on several judgments, including PCIT v. Abhisar Buildwell P. Ltd. (2023) 454 ITR 212 (SC), PCIT v. Saumya Construction (2017) 387 ITR 529 (Guj.), CIT v. Kabul Chawla (2015) 380 ITR 573 (Del.), PCIT v. Kutch Salt and Allied Industries (Tax Appeal 283 of 2023), and PCIT v. Backbone Projects Ltd. (Tax Appeal 88 of 2023). In these decisions it has been held that assessments framed under Section 153A or 153C must not be arbitrary but must be firmly based on material directly linked to t…