← 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

M/S. Yash-V-Jewels Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1415/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator

M/S. Yash-V-Jewels Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1414/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator

M/S. Yash-V-Jewels Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1413/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator

M/S. Yash-V-Jewels Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1412/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator

Yash -V-Jewels Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1411/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator

M/S. Yash-V-Jewels Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1410/MUM/2023[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator

M/S. Yash-V-Jewels Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

ITA 1409/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 1409 To 1415/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2008-09 To 2014-15) Yash-V-Jewels Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-1(1) Room No. 903, 9Th Floor, Office No. 501, Adibaba Vs. Apartment, Gazdar Scheme, Pratishtha Bhavan, (Old Cgo 16Th Floor, Near Rajesh Building (Annexe) M. K. Khanna Garden, Santacruz- Road, Mumbai-400020. West-400054. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy1119P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vimal Punmiya Revenue By: Dr. Kishore Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)45, Mumbai Dated 22.02.2023 For Ay. 2008-09 To 2015-16. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Brought To Our Notice That The Issue Raised In All The Captioned Appeals Are Similar (Except Difference In Sum/Figures). This Contention Of Ld. Ar Could Not Be Controverted By The Ld. Dr. Therefore, We Are Inclined To Take Up The Appeals Of Assessee For Ay. 2008-09 As Lead Case For Adjudication & The Decision In The Appeal I.E. Ay. 2008-09 Would Cover Other Appeals & Will Be Followed For Other Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule (DR)
Section 132Section 145Section 153C

that the assessee company is into trading of diamonds, investment and providing short term finance to borrowers. The AO noted that pursuant to search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’) in the premises of Shri Praveen Kumar Jain (entry operator