← 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

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -5(3), Mumbai vs. Underwater Services Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2341/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri N.K. Billaiya, Am Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Road, Mazgaon, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Road, Mazgaon, Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh/Akshy PawarFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(2)(b)

Assessment in case of the assessee was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 13.03.2015. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee on 23.11.2017. Consequent upon search action, proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act were initiated ... First Appellate Authority, Inter-alia challenging the validity of the additions made in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search and seizure operation. However, learned First Appellate Authority did not entertain assessee’s ground on the legal issue. However, he granted partial relief on merits

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5 (3), Mumbai vs. Underwater Services Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2340/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri N.K. Billaiya, Am Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Road, Mazgaon, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Road, Mazgaon, Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh/Akshy PawarFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(2)(b)

Assessment in case of the assessee was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 13.03.2015. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee on 23.11.2017. Consequent upon search action, proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act were initiated ... First Appellate Authority, Inter-alia challenging the validity of the additions made in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search and seizure operation. However, learned First Appellate Authority did not entertain assessee’s ground on the legal issue. However, he granted partial relief on merits

Underwater Services Company Ltd, Mumbai Suburban vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2265/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri N.K. Billaiya, Am Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Road, Mazgaon, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Road, Mazgaon, Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh/Akshy PawarFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(2)(b)

Assessment in case of the assessee was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 13.03.2015. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee on 23.11.2017. Consequent upon search action, proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act were initiated ... First Appellate Authority, Inter-alia challenging the validity of the additions made in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search and seizure operation. However, learned First Appellate Authority did not entertain assessee’s ground on the legal issue. However, he granted partial relief on merits

Underwater Services Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 2264/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri N.K. Billaiya, Am Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Road, Mazgaon, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K Underwater Services Company Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 23/24, Mbpt Building, Malet Bunder Central Circle 5(3), Road, Mazgaon, Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai- 400009 Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) : (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcu 0302K

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh/Akshy PawarFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(2)(b)

Assessment in case of the assessee was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 13.03.2015. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation u/s. 132 of the Act was carried out on the assessee on 23.11.2017. Consequent upon search action, proceedings u/s. 153A of the Act were initiated ... First Appellate Authority, Inter-alia challenging the validity of the additions made in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search and seizure operation. However, learned First Appellate Authority did not entertain assessee’s ground on the legal issue. However, he granted partial relief on merits

DCIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Gurpreet Kochar, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 940/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. Harpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4656N New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurmeet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aaipk4654Q New Delhi Appellant Respondent Dcit Vs. Gurpreet Kochar Central Circle-30, Room 5, Kg Marg, No. 320, E-2 Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extension, Pan: Aizpk6763F New Delhi Appellant Respondent C.O No. 46/Del/2023 In Ita No. 938/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Harpreetkochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4656N Appellant Respondent C.O No. 49/Del/2023 In Ita No. 939/Del/2020 (A.Y. 2015-16) Gurmeet Kochar Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-30, Room No. 5, Kg Marg, 320, E-2 Ara Centre, Jhandewalan New Delhi Extension, New Delhi Pan: Aaipk4654Q Appellant Respondent C.O Nos. 46, 47 & 49/Del/2020 Dcit Vs. Harpreetkochar

Section 132Section 153ASection 47Section 54F

appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was conducted by the Investigating Wing of the Department on 22/10/2016 in Sukhija Group ... supra), we permit the Assessee to urge the legal ground which has not been decided by the Ld. CIT(A). 11. During the search and seizure operation conducted u/s 132 of the Act dated 22/10/2016 on Sukhija Group of cases along with other cases at various residential and business premises