← 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

Geetha Mehra, Chennai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 4039/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ms. Geetha Mehra, Acit (3)(1)(1), C/O Synergy Art Foundation Ltd., Room No. 607, Aayakar Vs. 6/19 Ii Floor, Grants Building Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba, Road, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400020. (Formerly Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 44) Pan No. Aagpm 9039 H Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ajay Ghone, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Kailash Kanojia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ajay Ghone, AR
Section 13Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

that assessee is, promoter Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee is, promoter director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure action under ... discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search and seizure operation. seizure operation. 10.2 In the case in hand, it is not clear from the record 10.2 In the case in hand

Geetha Mehra, Chennai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 4038/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ms. Geetha Mehra, Acit (3)(1)(1), C/O Synergy Art Foundation Ltd., Room No. 607, Aayakar Vs. 6/19 Ii Floor, Grants Building Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba, Road, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400020. (Formerly Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 44) Pan No. Aagpm 9039 H Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ajay Ghone, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Kailash Kanojia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ajay Ghone, AR
Section 13Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

that assessee is, promoter Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee is, promoter director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure action under ... discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search and seizure operation. seizure operation. 10.2 In the case in hand, it is not clear from the record 10.2 In the case in hand

Geetha Mehra, Chennai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 4037/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ms. Geetha Mehra, Acit (3)(1)(1), C/O Synergy Art Foundation Ltd., Room No. 607, Aayakar Vs. 6/19 Ii Floor, Grants Building Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba, Road, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400020. (Formerly Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 44) Pan No. Aagpm 9039 H Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ajay Ghone, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Kailash Kanojia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ajay Ghone, AR
Section 13Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

that assessee is, promoter Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee is, promoter director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure action under ... discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search and seizure operation. seizure operation. 10.2 In the case in hand, it is not clear from the record 10.2 In the case in hand

Geetha Mehra, Chennai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 4036/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ms. Geetha Mehra, Acit (3)(1)(1), C/O Synergy Art Foundation Ltd., Room No. 607, Aayakar Vs. 6/19 Ii Floor, Grants Building Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba, Road, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400020. (Formerly Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 44) Pan No. Aagpm 9039 H Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ajay Ghone, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Kailash Kanojia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ajay Ghone, AR
Section 13Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

that assessee is, promoter Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee is, promoter director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure action under ... discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search and seizure operation. seizure operation. 10.2 In the case in hand, it is not clear from the record 10.2 In the case in hand

Geetha Mehra, Chennai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 44, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

ITA 4035/MUM/2016[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2002-03 & Assessment Year: 2003-04 & Assessment Year: 2004-05 & Assessment Year: 2005-06 & Assessment Year: 2006-07 & Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ms. Geetha Mehra, Acit (3)(1)(1), C/O Synergy Art Foundation Ltd., Room No. 607, Aayakar Vs. 6/19 Ii Floor, Grants Building Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Arthur Bunder Road, Colaba, Road, Mumbai-400 005. Mumbai-400020. (Formerly Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 44) Pan No. Aagpm 9039 H Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Mr. Ajay Ghone, Ar : Revenue By Mr. Kailash Kanojia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/08/2022 : Date Of Pronouncement 21/11/2022

For Respondent: Assessee by Mr. Ajay Ghone, AR
Section 13Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

that assessee is, promoter Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessee is, promoter director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure director of M/s Synergy Art foundation Ltd. A search and seizure action under ... discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search income or property discovered in the course of search and seizure operation. seizure operation. 10.2 In the case in hand, it is not clear from the record 10.2 In the case in hand

Pooja Dharamvir Thakur, Mumbai vs. ITO 24(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1901/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1901/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17) Pooja Dharamvir Thakur बिधम/ Ito-24(3)(3) Pooja Dharamvir Thakur, 701 Piramal Chambers Vs. 32, Wing 1B, Winderemere Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai- Oshiwara New Link Road, 400012. Near Green Park Andheri. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adfpt6305H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rajesh Sanghvi Revenue By: Shri Ganesh Bare (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/11/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-49, Mumbai Dated 28.06.2021 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) To Have Confirmed The Addition Of Rs.11 Lakhs U/S 69A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Bare (DR)
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 153CSection 69A

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). 3. Brief facts as noted by the Ld. CIT(A) is that pursuant to a search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act carried out in the case of Jain and Dixit Group of Indore, consequently a concern connected to them ... 153C of the Act to initiate action against the assessee u/s 153C of the Act. As per the information, AO noted that a search and seizure action u/s 132(1) of the Act was carried out at various residential and business premises connected to Jain and Dixit Group of Indore