Saraya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India

306 ITR 189High Court2008#2086 most cited

What is Saraya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India authority for?

For proceedings under section 153C to be initiated, the seized documents, books of account, or valuable articles must be of such a nature that they can persuade the Assessing Officer to reopen even closed assessments, indicating incriminating material related to undisclosed income.

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Saraya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India · 306 ITR 189 · section 153C · search and seizure · incriminating material · undisclosed income · reopening assessments

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153ASection 147Section 148Section 151Section 149Section 139
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 153atosection 153b(1)(a)abatement of assessmentsection 153c proceedingssection 113section 153b(1)section 158bdsection 153c(1)panchnamablock periodbest judgment assessmentsection 153b

Judgments citing Saraya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India

Chandra Vidya Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -28, Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 4022/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

…(1) that the Assessing Officer should also be satisfied that such valuable articles or books of account show to conclusively reflect or disclose any undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 17. The judgment of this court in Saraya Industries Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 257/306 ITR 189/171 Taxman 194 (Delhi) was relied upon by Mr. Bajpai, in support of his contention that the seizure of the document must be of such nature that even closed assessments for six years could be reopened and this requirement postulates that the provisions of section 153C can be set in motion only if there is a finding that the seized document or book…

Chandra Vidya Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -28, Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 4021/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

…(1) that the Assessing Officer should also be satisfied that such valuable articles or books of account show to conclusively reflect or disclose any undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 17. The judgment of this court in Saraya Industries Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 257/306 ITR 189/171 Taxman 194 (Delhi) was relied upon by Mr. Bajpai, in support of his contention that the seizure of the document must be of such nature that even closed assessments for six years could be reopened and this requirement postulates that the provisions of section 153C can be set in motion only if there is a finding that the seized document or book…

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

…such valuable articles or books of account or documents belonging to the other person must be shown to show to conclusively reflect or disclose any undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 17. The judgment of this court in Saraya Industries Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 257/306 ITR 189/171 Taxman 194 (Delhi) was relied upon by Mr. Bajpai, in support of his contention that the seizure of the document must be of such nature that even closed assessments for six years could be reopened and this requirement postulates that the provisions of section 153C can be set in motion only if there is a finding that the seized document or book…

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

…such valuable articles or books of account or documents belonging to the other person must be shown to show to conclusively reflect or disclose any undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 17. The judgment of this court in Saraya Industries Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 257/306 ITR 189/171 Taxman 194 (Delhi) was relied upon by Mr. Bajpai, in support of his contention that the seizure of the document must be of such nature that even closed assessments for six years could be reopened and this requirement postulates that the provisions of section 153C can be set in motion only if there is a finding that the seized document or book…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)- 3 vs. M/S Ridgeview Construction Pvt. Ltd

ITA/618/2019HC Delhi13 Feb 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 133ASection 153C

…ITA 618/2019 & 621/2019 Page 1 of 17 $~195 & 196 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: 13.02.2025 + ITA 618/2019 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)- 3 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Indruj Singh Rai, SSC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Mr. Rahul Singh, JSCs & Mr. Anmol Jagga and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advs. versus M/S RIDGEVIEW CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gautam…

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

…such valuable articles or books of account or documents belonging to the other person must be shown to show to conclusively reflect or disclose any undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 17. The judgment of this court in Saraya Industries Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 257/306 ITR 189/171 Taxman 194 (Delhi) was relied upon by Mr. Bajpai, in support of his contention that the seizure of the document must be of such nature that even closed assessments for six years could be reopened and this requirement postulates that the provisions of section 153C can be set in motion only if there is a finding that the seized document or book…

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

…such valuable articles or books of account or documents belonging to the other person must be shown to show to conclusively reflect or disclose any undisclosed income. xxxx xxxx xxxx 17. The judgment of this court in Saraya Industries Ltd. [2008] 216 CTR 257/306 ITR 189/171 Taxman 194 (Delhi) was relied upon by Mr. Bajpai, in support of his contention that the seizure of the document must be of such nature that even closed assessments for six years could be reopened and this requirement postulates that the provisions of section 153C can be set in motion only if there is a finding that the seized document or book…

DCIT, CC - 2(4), Mumbai vs. Mishal Nickunj Shah Shri. L/H. of Late Nickunj Gunvantrai Shah, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2312/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 10(38)Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…t only the statement recorded u/s.153A cannot be considered as incriminating, if no evidences are found to be adverse. vii. We place reliance on the following case laws to support the above mentioned contention: Saraya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2008] 306 ITR 189 (Delhi): It was held that, the search or requisition must be of such a character as topersuade the Assessing Officer to even reopen closed assessments and thereshould be incriminating material on search or requisition for issue of anotice under section 153A. Pr. CIT v. MeetaGutgutia [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Delhi): It has been held and we quote, "56.…

DCIT, CC - 2(4), Mumbai vs. Mishal Nickunj Shah Shri. L/H. of Late Nickunj Gunvantrai Shah, Mumbai

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2311/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 10(38)Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…t only the statement recorded u/s.153A cannot be considered as incriminating, if no evidences are found to be adverse. vii. We place reliance on the following case laws to support the above mentioned contention: Saraya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2008] 306 ITR 189 (Delhi): It was held that, the search or requisition must be of such a character as topersuade the Assessing Officer to even reopen closed assessments and thereshould be incriminating material on search or requisition for issue of anotice under section 153A. Pr. CIT v. MeetaGutgutia [2017] 395 ITR 526 (Delhi): It has been held and we quote, "56.…

Orissa Cricket Association, Cuttack vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 177/CTK/2020[2001-02]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack20 Jun 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaorissa Cricket Association, Barabati Statidum, Cuttack Pan No.Aaaao 0319 F …………….. Assessee Versus Acit (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar ………………Revenue

Section 153ASection 153C

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री अरुण खोड़पऩया ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Orissa Cricket Association, Barabati Statidum, Cuttack PAN No.AAAAO 0319 F …………….. Assessee Versus ACIT (Exemptions), Bhubaneswar ………………Revenue Shri S.K.Sarangi, CA and Shri Digant Das, Advocate for the assessee Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR for the Revenue Date of Hearing : 20/06/2022 Date of Pronouncement : 20/06/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal…

Mahugun India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2817/DEL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anandee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 276DSection 37(1)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANANDEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 2817/Del/2012 (Assessment Year: 2003-04) Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd., Asstt. Comm. Of Income Tax, B-66, 1st Floor, Vivek Vihar, Vs. Central Circle 3, Delhi-110095. New Delhi. PAN No.-AAACM6572A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Sumit Aggarwal, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Shefali Swaroop, CIT (DR) ORDER PER: ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM This appeal by the Assessee is filed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-II, Delhi, da…

Vashdev G Adnani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2322/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2005-06 Vashdev G Adnani, Acit 19(1) G-4, Sea Crest, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai Vs. Seven Bunglows Gardens, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 061. Pan Abapa7414M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Prakash PanditFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI Before Shri Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Assessment Year : 2005-06 Vashdev G Adnani, ACIT 19(1) G-4, Sea Crest, 2nd Floor, Mumbai Vs. Seven Bunglows Gardens, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 061. PAN ABAPA7414M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Prakash Pandit Respondent By : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai Date of Hearing :13.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 18.05.2018 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 31.01.2014, pa…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3833/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…l and Ors. Vs Preventive Intelligence Officer, Central Excise and Customs Agra 80 ITR 418 (All) " Om Parkash Jindal Vs UOI 104 ITR 381 (P&H) " Auto Finance (P) Ltd. 300 ITR 83 (Del.) " Manish Maheshwari Vs ACIT 289 ITR 341 (SC) " Saraya Industries Ltd. Vs UOI 306 ITR 189 (Del.) " Sinhgad Technical Education Society Vs ACIT 140 TTJ 233 (Pune) " All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs DCIT 137 ITD 287 (Mum) " CIT Vs Chetan Das Lachman Das 254 CTR 392 (Del) " CIT Vs Anil Bhatia 211 Taxmann 453 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del.) " Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. & Ors 299 ITR 268 (Del.) " CIT Vs Lovely…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M.N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 3832/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Jm Ita No. 3832/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2005-06 Ita No. 3833/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S M. N. Securities Pvt. Ltd., 8Th Floor, Statesman House, Tax, Central Circle-19, New Delhi Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadcm0102D Assessee By : Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Shefali Swroop, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.02.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2018 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Two Appeals By The Department Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Each Dated 25.04.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shashi Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68

…l and Ors. Vs Preventive Intelligence Officer, Central Excise and Customs Agra 80 ITR 418 (All) " Om Parkash Jindal Vs UOI 104 ITR 381 (P&H) " Auto Finance (P) Ltd. 300 ITR 83 (Del.) " Manish Maheshwari Vs ACIT 289 ITR 341 (SC) " Saraya Industries Ltd. Vs UOI 306 ITR 189 (Del.) " Sinhgad Technical Education Society Vs ACIT 140 TTJ 233 (Pune) " All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. Vs DCIT 137 ITD 287 (Mum) " CIT Vs Chetan Das Lachman Das 254 CTR 392 (Del) " CIT Vs Anil Bhatia 211 Taxmann 453 (Del.) " CIT Vs Sophia Finance Ltd. 205 ITR 98 (Del.) " Divine Leasing and Finance Ltd. & Ors 299 ITR 268 (Del.) " CIT Vs Lovely…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Divya Jain, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue Dismissed and Cross

ITA 4315/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Md. Mohsin Alam, CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153C

…9/- (being half share of the assessee, inclusive of expenses). PB 34-40 are the submission before Ld. A.O. submitting that the document was not incriminating and was disclosed in the return and relying upon the following decision:- Saraya Industries vs. UOI 306 ITR 189 (Delhi) Jurisdiction is bad on this reason also that the assessment of the assessee was not pending and therefore, could not CO No. 355/Del/2011 be reopened up 153C in view of the following decisions reported at PB 37:- Anil P. Khimani v/s. DCIT 2010 - TIOL -177 ITAT - Mumbai "B" Bench Anil Kumar Bhatia vis. ACIT (ITA No. 2660to2665/Del/2009 I…