← All Phrases

“search assessment”

Search & SeizureSection 153ASection 153A2,574 judgments

The decision most relied on for search assessment is CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573), cited in 3,235 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on search assessment

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

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.

Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia
395 ITR 526 · 2017 · High Court
1,226
citing judgments

In search assessments under Section 153A, additions to income are permissible only if incriminating material is found during the search; in the absence of such material, completed assessments cannot be disturbed. A statement recorded under Section 132(4) and later retracted may not, on its own, constitute sufficient incriminating evidence for making additions.

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.

PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd.
397 ITR 82 · 2017 · High Court
786
citing judgments

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not by itself constitute incriminating material for making additions to income.

CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd.
380 ITR 612 · 2016 · High Court
689
citing judgments

Completed assessments can be interfered with under Section 153A or 153C only on the basis of incriminating material unearthed during the search, necessitating a direct correlation between the discovered material and the power to assess or reopen concluded assessments.

Judgments citing search assessment

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in Section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to ten AYs' consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant assessment year” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall ... beyond the six year block period but not later than ten AYs'. The block period for search assessment thus came to be enlarged to stretch up to ten AYs'. The 2017 Amending Act also put in place certain prerequisite conditions which would have to inevitably be shown to be satisfied

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in Section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to ten AYs' consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant assessment year” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall ... beyond the six year block period but not later than ten AYs'. The block period for search assessment thus came to be enlarged to stretch up to ten AYs'. The 2017 Amending Act also put in place certain prerequisite conditions which would have to inevitably be shown to be satisfied

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in Section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to ten AYs' consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant assessment year” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall ... beyond the six year block period but not later than ten AYs'. The block period for search assessment thus came to be enlarged to stretch up to ten AYs'. The 2017 Amending Act also put in place certain prerequisite conditions which would have to inevitably be shown to be satisfied

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

virtue of the 2017 Amending Act, significant amendments came to be introduced in Section 153A. These included, inter alia, the search assessment block being enlarged to ten AYs' consequent to the addition of the stipulation of “relevant assessment year” and which was defined to mean those years which would fall ... beyond the six year block period but not later than ten AYs'. The block period for search assessment thus came to be enlarged to stretch up to ten AYs'. The 2017 Amending Act also put in place certain prerequisite conditions which would have to inevitably be shown to be satisfied

DCIT CC -4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3614/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

DCIT CC -4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3610/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

DCIT CC 4 (4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3606/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 69C

conducted in the case of the assessee in September, September, September, 2015 2015 2015 and and and consequent consequent consequent search search search assessment assessment assessment was was was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee income of the assessee

DCIT CC 4 (4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3605/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 69C

conducted in the case of the assessee in September, September, September, 2015 2015 2015 and and and consequent consequent consequent search search search assessment assessment assessment was was was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee income of the assessee

DCIT CC 4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3603/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 69C

conducted in the case of the assessee in September, September, September, 2015 2015 2015 and and and consequent consequent consequent search search search assessment assessment assessment was was was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee income of the assessee

DCIT CC 4(4), Mumbai vs. Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3602/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

ITA 3491/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3474/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 69C

conducted in the case of the assessee in September, September, September, 2015 2015 2015 and and and consequent consequent consequent search search search assessment assessment assessment was was was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee income of the assessee

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

ITA 3473/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-4(4), Mumbai

ITA 3472/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Taxcentral Circle-4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed whereas

ITA 3471/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Mr. Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 149Section 151Section 69C

Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted in the case of the assessee in September, 2015 and consequent search assessment was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,80,97,990/-. 5.1 Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A

Sanman Trade Impex Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- Central Circle 4(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are partly allowed appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3470/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Appellant: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Joshi
Section 143(3)Section 69C

conducted in the case of the assessee in September, September, September, 2015 2015 2015 and and and consequent consequent consequent search search search assessment assessment assessment was was was completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total completed on 29.12.2017, wherein the total income of the assessee income of the assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 16, Delhi vs. Umrao Hotels and Resorts Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and the appeal preferred by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3045/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2867 /Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Umrao Hotels & Resorts Vs. Acit Pvt. Ltd., The Umrao, Nh- Central Circle – 16 48, Vill Samalkha, Near Delhi Rajori Crossing, New Delhi – 110037 Pan: Aaacu 6777 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & I.T.A. Nos. 3045/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Dcit Vs. Umrao Hotels & Resorts Central Circle – 16 Pvt. Ltd., The Umrao, Nh- Delhi-110055 48, Vill Samalkha, Near Rajori Crossing, New Delhi - 110037 Pan: Aaacu 6777 D

For Appellant: Shri S. C. Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

prerequisite came to be incorporated in Section 153C, no such corresponding precondition was included in Section 153A. This, although the legislative history of the search assessment provisions placed in the Act would indicate that they were amended from time to time in order to constitute a complete and homogeneous code ... Asst.Year :2018-19 those two provisions being applicable to searches undertaken in a particular time period, the principles of abatement being replicated and the search assessment power being available to be invoked for the "relevant assessment year", and which extended the power to be exercised over a ten year block

Umrao Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and the appeal preferred by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2867/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. Nos. 2867 /Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Umrao Hotels & Resorts Vs. Acit Pvt. Ltd., The Umrao, Nh- Central Circle – 16 48, Vill Samalkha, Near Delhi Rajori Crossing, New Delhi – 110037 Pan: Aaacu 6777 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & I.T.A. Nos. 3045/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Dcit Vs. Umrao Hotels & Resorts Central Circle – 16 Pvt. Ltd., The Umrao, Nh- Delhi-110055 48, Vill Samalkha, Near Rajori Crossing, New Delhi - 110037 Pan: Aaacu 6777 D

For Appellant: Shri S. C. Garg, C.AFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-D.R
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

prerequisite came to be incorporated in Section 153C, no such corresponding precondition was included in Section 153A. This, although the legislative history of the search assessment provisions placed in the Act would indicate that they were amended from time to time in order to constitute a complete and homogeneous code ... Asst.Year :2018-19 those two provisions being applicable to searches undertaken in a particular time period, the principles of abatement being replicated and the search assessment power being available to be invoked for the "relevant assessment year", and which extended the power to be exercised over a ten year block

ACIT, Central Circle, Meerut vs. Mohd. Zahid Siddiqui, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 25/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 25/Del/2023 (A.Y 2019-20) Acit Mohd. Zahid Siddiqui 3Rd Floor, Income Tax Vs. 246, Lane No. 4, Haiderpur Office, Opposite Bainsali Road, Shalimar Bagh, Ground, Meerut, New Delhi Uttar Pradesh Pan No. Abopz6005F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Vaibhav Goel, Ca Department By: Sh. Anshul, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.07.2024

For Appellant: Sh. Vaibhav Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153CSection 68Section 69A

Lucknow Airport and cash of Rs. 10,00,000/- was found from his possession. The warrant was executed over Sh. Firoz Rana and the search assessment proceedings were completed u/s 153A of IT Act. However during the search proceedings, post search inquiries and assessment proceedings in case of Sh. Firoz

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Seh Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, cross objections of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2693/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshseh Realtors Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Acit, F-88, Okhla Indl. Area, Central Circle-8, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aagcs7537M Acit, Vs. Seh Realtors Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-8, F-88, Okhla Indl. Area, New Delhi Phase-1, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aagcs7537M Co No. 9/Del/2022 (In Ita No.2693/Del/2017) (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit, Vs. Seh Realtors Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-8, F-88, Okhla Indl. Area, New Delhi Phase-1, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aagcs7537M

For Appellant: Shri M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 7

decision of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Anju Bansal in ITA 368/2023 dated 13.07.2023 had quashed the search assessment proceedings as there was no valid approval u/s 153D by the ld JCIT. He also placed on record that this tribunal decision ... range. ITA No.2693/Del/2017 CO No. 9/Del/2022 SEH Realtors Pvt. Ltd He argued that in a Central Range, the ld. JCIT is involved in the search assessment proceedings right from the time of receipt of appraisal report from the Investigation Wing and is involved with the Ld. AO from time