← 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

Kiran Devi Agarwal, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 301/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.301 To 303/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21) Kiran Devi Agarwal, Hyderabad. Pan:Adopa7925R (Appellant) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.304 To 306/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21) Ankit Agarwal, Hyderabad. Pan:Bnlpa0543D (Appellant) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: Shri Sharad Chandra Toshniwal, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 14/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By The Captioned Assessees, Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)") For The A.Ys.2018-19 To 2020-21 Respectively. These Six Appeals Of The Assessees Involve Identical Issues Arising Out Of Similar Facts & Are Therefore Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Consistency. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 14 Days In Some Appeals & 15 Days In Others. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions Along With Affidavits, Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Going Through The Condonation Petitions & The Material On Record & Considering The Submissions Of The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. Ar") & The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. Dr"), In The Interest Of Substantial Justice, We Condone The Delay In Filing All The Appeals & Admit Them For Adjudication On Merits.

For Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132(4)Section 153C

justice and against the law. 4.1 Section 132(4) of Income tax Act "(4) The authorised officer may, during the course of the search or seizure, examine on oath any person who is found to be in possession or control of any books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery ... Department at the premises of Shri Ashok Kumar Agrawal, the husband of the assessee. Based on information shared by the GST Department, a search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") was conducted on the same day at his premises. Subsequently, a notice

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi vs. Archana Dalmia, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3998/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3998/िद"ी/2024(िन.व. 2014-15) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 52(1), 14Th Floor, E-2 Block Civic Centre, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 11002 बनाम Vs. Archana Dalmia, 3, Sikandra Road, Kalmia House, New Delhi ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aagpd-7794-N Assessee By : S/Shri Kunal Agarwal, Chartered Accountant & Manish Agarwal, Advocate Department By: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 10/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2024, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Sold 23,500 Shares Of Durga Enterprises P. Ltd., During The Period Relevant To Assessment Year Under Appeal To Pyramid Commodities (P) Ltd. (Unrelated Party) For A Total Consideration Of Rs.19,97,50,000/-. The Assessee Suffered Long Term

For Appellant: S/Shri Kunal Agarwal, Chartered Accountant &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 148Section 55(2)(b)

sale of aforesaid shares and the same was reflected by the assessee in her return of income for AY 2014-15. 2.1. A search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was carried out in the case

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Subbiah Nadar Jegatheesan, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 603/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:603/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Subbiah Nadar Jegatheesan, Tax, Vs. 3, Ml Theri Road, Keeraikaranthattu, Central Circle -2, Mahadevankulam, Madurai. Tirunelveli – 627 657. [Pan:Abxpj-7672-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025

For Appellant: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 68Section 69A

assessee during the year; ii. High value cash withdrawals during the year; and iii. Large agricultural income shown in ITR 4. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was conducted in October 2018 in the case of the assessee and other entities forming :-3-: ITA. No:603/Chny/2025 ... that they be upheld. 23. The ld. AR also made additional submissions to the effect that the assessee had been subjected to a search and seizure action under the provisions of the Act. However, during the course of such proceedings, no incriminating material was unearthed which would suggest that

Tremendous Mining and Minerals Pvt Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 157/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Tremendous Mining & Vs Dcit, Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3, Cabin No.-1, 1205, New Delhi. 89-Hemkunth Chamber, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aacct8840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwini Kumar, Ca & Shri Ankur Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.01.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-23/10303/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 24.12.2019 Passed U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Dcit, Central Circle- 3, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Ashwini Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

under scrutiny through CASS and the regular assessment was completed on 23.03.2015 u/s 143(3) of the Act at the returned income. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of M/s Bhushan Steel Ltd. (BSL) group and its group concerns

Himgiri Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 11(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7080/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarhimgiri Realtors Private Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward 11 (3), Flat No.818, 8Th Floor, New Delhi. Devika Tower 6, Nehru Place, New Deli – 110 019. (Pan : Aabch6093E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri I.P. Bansal, Advocate Shri Vivek Bansal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-35, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 28.08.2018 For Assessment Year 2012-13 Raising Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Impugned Appeal Order Is Bad In Law, Illegal & In Violation Of Rudimentary Principal Of Contemporary Jurisprudence.

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 2(22)(e)Section 68

order, assessee is in appeal before the ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) after considering the detailed submissions held as under :- “4.3.3.3. A search and seizure operation was conducted of M/s Aeren Group of companies on 17.0B.2011 and during the course of search operation, some of the connected entities