← All Phrases

“search and seizure”

Search & SeizureSection 132Section 13210,164 judgments

The decision most relied on for search and seizure is CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. (374 ITR 645), cited in 1,823 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on search and seizure

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
397 ITR 344 · 2017 · Supreme Court
1,589
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

All Cargo Global Logistics Ltd. v. DCIT
137 ITD 287 · 2012 · ITAT
907
citing judgments

In non-abated assessments, the Assessing Officer can make additions under section 153A based on books of accounts or documents found during a search but not produced during the original assessment, provided such material is incriminating.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal
290 CTR 263 · 2016 · High Court
583
citing judgments

Assessment based solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act requires the statement to be relatable to incriminating material or evidence found during the search, especially when considering Section 158BB(1) which restricts computation of undisclosed income to evidence found during search.

CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia
352 ITR 493 · 2013 · High Court
537
citing judgments

Section 153A can be invoked to reassess income for all years under consideration prior to a search, even if returns for those years were processed under Section 143(1)(a). The Assessing Officer has the power to reassess total income in such cases without fetters.

E.N. Gopakumar v. CIT
75 Taxmann.com 215 · 2016 · High Court
428
citing judgments

In search assessments conducted under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, additions to the assessee's income can be made even in the absence of incriminating material found during a search operation conducted under Section 132.

DCIT v. Sunil Kumar Sharma
159 Taxmann.com 179 · 2024 · High Court
269
citing judgments

Loose sheets of paper containing jottings, not shown to be part of regularly maintained books of accounts, do not constitute incriminating material for initiating assessment under section 153C. The satisfaction note required for 153C proceedings must specify the assessment year to which the alleged incriminating material belongs.

Kishore Kumar v. Deputy Commissioner of Income
52 Taxmann.com 449 · 2014 · High Court
255
citing judgments

An unretracted admission of undisclosed income made by an assessee in a sworn statement under Section 132(4) during a search and seizure operation forms a valid basis for making additions and levying tax, especially when no books of accounts are maintained.

Judgments citing search and seizure

Shashi Infra Construction Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. ITO, Lucknow

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 353/LKW/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 Shashi Infra V. The Constructions Pvt Ltd Addl/Joint/Deputy/Asstt/Income 328B, 5Th Lane Rajendra Tax Officer, Lucknow Nagar, Lucknow-226004. National Faceless Assessment Centre Delhi Tan/Pan:Aaucs5802M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Saurabh Gupta, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 253(3)Section 694ASection 69A

provided which had given accommodation entries to such Surat based companies. Statements of many entry operators and dummy Directors recorded during various search and seizure operation, survey operation and Investigation were checked. The Assessing Officer thereupon proceeded to record that" On perusal of data so provided by the DDIT

Beegeey Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT (Central) - 2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 790/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2025AY 2021-2022
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263

case are that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Act showing total income of Rs.1,710/-. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the cases of Raj Group & Others and the assessee being one of the persons/concerns related ... Giridhari Lal Goenka, was also covered under the search and seizure operation and during the course of search and seizure operation, various incriminating materials/documents were found and seized. The return of income of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the case was assessed u/s 143(3) vide order dated

Arun Engineering Udyog Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT (Central) - 2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 786/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2021-22 Arun Engineering Udyog Pvt. Ltd……………………………….……….……Appellant 151/A, Cotton Street, Burrabazar, Kol - 700007. [Pan: Aalca8127A] Vs. Pcit(Central)-2, Kolkata…………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 04, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 11, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.02.2025 Of The Principal Cit(Central), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Pcit”] Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263

case are that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Act showing total income at Nil. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the cases of Raj Group & Others and the assessee being one of the persons/concerns related to Giridhari ... Goenka, was also covered under the search and seizure operation and during the course of search and seizure operation, various incriminating materials/documents were found and seized. The return of income of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the case Arun Engineering Udyog Pvt. Ltd was assessed

Decorum Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr. CIT (Central) - 2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 785/KOL/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 263

case are that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Act showing loss of Rs.2,90,287/-. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the cases of Raj Group & Others and the assessee being one of the persons/concerns related ... Giridhari Lal Goenka, was also covered under the search and seizure operation and during the course of search and seizure operation, various incriminating materials/documents were found and seized. The return of income of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the case was assessed u/s 143(3) vide order dated

ACIT, Central Circle 1(1), Bengaluru vs. Sunil Suresh, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2168/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2020-21 Acit, Vs. Shri. Sunil Suresh, Central Circle – 1(1), S-02, Skyline Apartment, Ieonard Lane, Bangalore. Richmond Town, Bangalore – 560 025, Karnataka. Pan : Akrps 0614 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. V. Srinivasan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 12.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 144(3)Section 69

vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/ALP/M/250/2024-25/1068986756(1) dated 23.09.2024. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a search and seizure under section 132(1) of the Act was conducted on 14.11.2019 in the case of Stanley Group. As part of search action, the residential premises of the assessee ... note accepted in return income filed by the assessee’s spouse. 6. Considering the Order of the authorities below, we noted that a search and seizure action was conducted on 14.11.2019 in the case of Stanley Group. Page 6 of 8 As part of the said search action, the residential

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai vs. Prarambh Securities Private Limited, Gujarat

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3892/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2025AY 2023-24
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

return of income on 31/02/2022 declaring total income of Rs.22,83,11,800/- which was duly processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. A search and seizure action was carried out in the case of the assessee on 10/05/2023 and consequently, notice u/s.148 was issued on 04/03/2024, in response to which

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai vs. Prarambh Securities Private Limited, Gujarat

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3891/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

return of income on 31/02/2022 declaring total income of Rs.22,83,11,800/- which was duly processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. A search and seizure action was carried out in the case of the assessee on 10/05/2023 and consequently, notice u/s.148 was issued on 04/03/2024, in response to which

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(4), Mumbai vs. Prarambh Securities Private Limited, Gujarat

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3890/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2025AY 2021-22
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194Section 194CSection 194JSection 40

return of income on 31/02/2022 declaring total income of Rs.22,83,11,800/- which was duly processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. A search and seizure action was carried out in the case of the assessee on 10/05/2023 and consequently, notice u/s.148 was issued on 04/03/2024, in response to which

DCIT- Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. Radhamohan Marketing Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 3 of the revenue challenging the decision of ld

ITA 1600/MUM/2025[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Dcit - Central Circle-3(4), Radhamohan Marketing Mumbai Private Limited Room No. 25, Shanti Bhawan, 2Nd Vs. Floor, Near Brijwasi Sweet 198, Kalba Devi Road, Mumbai – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aafcr5067C (Appellant) : (Respondent) C.O. No. 88/Mum/2025 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 1600/Mum/2025) (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Radhamohan Marketing Private Dcit - Central Circle-3(4), Limited Mumbai Room No. 25, Shanti Bhawan, 2Nd Floor, Near Brijwasi Sweet 198, Vs. Kalba Devi Road, Mumbai – 400002. Pan/Gir No. Aafcr5067C (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Vijay Mehta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad, (CIT-
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 69A

Assessing Officer u/s. 153D of the Act is invalid and bad in law.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure action u/s. 132 of the Act was conducted upon the assessee on 24.09.2019. The matter thereafter was centralized with Central Circle-3(4) Mumbai. Notice ... record any finding qua any other business income or source of income neither any conclusion on this aspect has been made by the search and seizure action. Hence, the natural inference would be that the cash has been generated from the business of assessee which the assessee has shown

Radhakishan Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 695/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

consequence of the order of a Tribunal or a Court. On the contrary, Explanation 2 which deals with the information received during search and seizure operations under Section 132 requires fulfillment of pre- requisites conditions. noted hereinbefore, in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue ... provisions of Explanation 1 clause (i) to Section 148, which is not applicable in the case of information received during the course of search and seizure under Section 132. (25) From the language employed in the Explanation 1 and Explanation 2 to Section 148 of the Act' 1961, we reach

Radhakishna Beniwal, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 694/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT
Section 139Section 144Section 147rSection 148Section 148ASection 194CSection 251Section 68

consequence of the order of a Tribunal or a Court. On the contrary, Explanation 2 which deals with the information received during search and seizure operations under Section 132 requires fulfillment of pre- requisites conditions. noted hereinbefore, in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue ... provisions of Explanation 1 clause (i) to Section 148, which is not applicable in the case of information received during the course of search and seizure under Section 132. (25) From the language employed in the Explanation 1 and Explanation 2 to Section 148 of the Act' 1961, we reach

Lakhvir Kaur, Mohali vs. DCIT/ACIT(Cen)-2, Chandigarh

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are

ITA 1165/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Sept 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 65BSection 69C

into account the submissions of the Ld. CIT-DR, the assessment order, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The fact of search and seizure operation conducted on 28.01.2021 is not in dispute. It was further explained that the daughter of the assessee is a permanent resident of Canada ... into account the submissions of the Ld. CIT–DR, the assessment order, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The fact of search and seizure operation conducted on 28.01.2021 is not in dispute. In the absence of any cogent evidence brought on record by the Revenue to the contrary

Lakhvir Kaur, Mohali, Chandigarh vs. DCIT/ACIT(Cen)-2 Chd, Chandigarh

In the result, both the above appeals of the Assessee are

ITA 1164/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 65BSection 69C

into account the submissions of the Ld. CIT-DR, the assessment order, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The fact of search and seizure operation conducted on 28.01.2021 is not in dispute. It was further explained that the daughter of the assessee is a permanent resident of Canada ... into account the submissions of the Ld. CIT–DR, the assessment order, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The fact of search and seizure operation conducted on 28.01.2021 is not in dispute. In the absence of any cogent evidence brought on record by the Revenue to the contrary

Sakar Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1181/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 263Section 80G

order reveals that the information in possession of the Department of M/s. Aadhar Foundation being involved in providing bogus donation, emanated from the search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act being conducted on 02.02.2021 in the case of Political Parties and Charitable Organizations group, covering mainly three registered unrecognized ... Aadhar Foundation (PAN: AADTA6700A) and deduction amounting to Rs.7,00,000/- has been claimed u/s 80G of the Act. 4.1 A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted on 02.02.2021 in the case of "Political Parties and Charitable Organizations Group". The search operation covered

Sakar Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1172/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: us in both the appeals and for the sake of convenience we are reproducing grounds raised in ITA No.1172/Ahd/2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2020-21:

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 263Section 80G

order reveals that the information in possession of the Department of M/s. Aadhar Foundation being involved in providing bogus donation, emanated from the search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act being conducted on 02.02.2021 in the case of Political Parties and Charitable Organizations group, covering mainly three registered unrecognized ... Aadhar Foundation (PAN: AADTA6700A) and deduction amounting to Rs.7,00,000/- has been claimed u/s 80G of the Act. 4.1 A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted on 02.02.2021 in the case of "Political Parties and Charitable Organizations Group". The search operation covered

Ravindar Reddy Miryala, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 761/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Sri T. Chaitanya Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153C

Income Tax Act [in short “the Act”] on 14.06.2021 and the loss reduced to Rs.(-)1,32,90,940/-. Consequent to search and seizure operation conducted on 28.01.2021 in the case of Sri V V Bala Krishna Rao (HUF), Prop. Usha Pictures and Financiers, Eluru, the case of the assessee ... centralized to DCIT, Central Circle 1(3), Hyderabad, vide order u/s. 127 dated 22.03.2022 of Pr. CIT-1 Hyderabad. During the course of search and seizure operation in the case of Sri V. V. Bala Krishna Rao, Prop: Usha Pictures and Financiers, certain loose sheets were found at the Office

Sunil Kumar Jain, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 616/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, Rajesh VaishnavFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

evidence in support of cash of Rs.33,00,000/- and accordingly entire amount was seized in the hands of assessee. Consequent upon the search and seizure operations, during the financial year 2020-21, this case has been taken up for scrutiny for the assessment year 2021- 2022 being the 'specified

Nimmatoori Sulochana, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 603/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269Section 271Section 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273B

Assessment Year 2017-2018 on 29.12.2017 admitting total income of Rs.3,53,050/-, after claiming Chapter-VIA deductions of Rs.1,50,000/-. A Search and Seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] was conducted in the case of M/s. Aurora Educational Society & others

Nimmatoori Yashoda, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle 2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 602/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269Section 271Section 271DSection 271D(2)Section 273B

Assessment Year 2017-2018 on 29.12.2017 admitting total income of Rs.3,53,050/-, after claiming Chapter-VIA deductions of Rs.1,50,000/-. A Search and Seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] was conducted in the case of M/s. Aurora Educational Society & others

People Media Factory LLP, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle- 1(3), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 298/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, A SrinivasFor Respondent: Sri Madan Mohan Meena, Sr. AR
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 250Section 68

return of income for the impugned assessment year 2020-2021 on 31.03.2021 by admitting an income of Rs.1,13,35,860/-. Consequent to search and seizure operation conducted on 28.01.2021 in the case of Sri V V Bala Krishna Rao (HUF), Prop: Usha Pictures and Financiers, Eluru, the case ... Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] dated 22.03.2022 of Pr. CIT-1 Hyderabad. During the 3 ITA.No.298/Hyd./2025 course of search and seizure operation in the case of Sri V V Bala Krishna Rao, Prop: Usha Pictures and Financiers, certain loose sheets were found at the office