← All Phrases

“documents seized”

Search & SeizureSection 132Section 1322,593 judgments

The decision most relied on for documents seized is SSP Aviation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (346 ITR 177), cited in 308 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on documents seized

SSP Aviation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
346 ITR 177 · 2012 · High Court
308
citing judgments

The date of initiation of search or requisition for the purpose of abatement of assessment proceedings is the date of search or requisition, or the date of receipt of seized documents by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer, whichever is later. Proceedings under section 153C can only be initiated by the Assessing Officer of the searched person after being satisfied that seized documents belong to another person.

CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P)
294 ITR 49 · 2007 · Supreme Court
299
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on uncorroborated third-party statements, documents, or loose sheets seized during a search, and such evidence requires the assessee to be provided with an opportunity for cross-examination.

ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
394 ITR 569 · 2017 · High Court
282
citing judgments

For initiating proceedings under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and specifically relate to the assessment years for which assessments are reopened. A document relevant only for one year cannot be used to reopen other assessment years without being incriminating for those years.

Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd. v. ACIT
370 ITR 295 · 2015 · High Court
249
citing judgments

Section 153C of the Income-tax Act is invoked only when it is established that seized documents do not belong to the searched person, or if the searched person disclaims them; the satisfaction note must specifically indicate this fact.

Manish Maheshwari v. ACIT
289 ITR 341 · 2007 · Supreme Court
237
citing judgments

A block assessment proceeding under section 158BD is illegal if the procedure laid down in section 153C is not followed. The provisions of section 153C are similar to section 158BD in block assessment proceedings.

Pr. CIT v. Index Securities (P.) Ltd.
86 Taxmann.com 84 · 2017 · High Court
184
citing judgments

For a valid reassessment under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and directly relevant to the assessment years being reopened. Documents that are not incriminating or do not relate to the assessment years do not satisfy the jurisdictional requirement.

CIT v. Girish Chaudhary
296 ITR 619 · 2008 · High Court
175
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on "dumb documents" or vague loose papers seized during a search that merely indicate rates without specific corroborative material linking them to the assessee's unaccounted transactions. The presumption under Section 292C may not apply to such documents.

CIT v. Sant Lal
118 Taxmann.com 432 · 2020 · High Court
154
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made solely on the basis of entries in a diary seized from a third party if the diary is not found in the assessee's premises, not in the assessee's handwriting, and the revenue fails to provide corroborative evidence linking the assessee to the diary.

Judgments citing documents seized

DCIT, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Hill Max Export, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 742/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.: 742/Chny/2023 & Co No.: 39/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Hill Max Export, Tax, V. No. 149/1, Central Circle 2(1), Pollachi Main Road, Room No. B3, Ground Floor, Kattampatti, Investigation Building, Jakkarpalayam-Vaipollachi, Chennai – 34. Coimbatore – 642 202. [Pan:Aahfh-2574-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. V. Nanda Kumar, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Fca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 28.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. V. Nanda Kumar, CIT
Section 132Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 69B

purpose of arriving at the satisfaction that any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles or things or any books of accounts or documents seized or requisitioned pertains or pertain to or relates to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A of the Act which were ... records a satisfaction that any money, bullion or other valuable article or thing seized or requisitioned, belongs to or any books of accounts or documents seized or requisitioned pertains to or any information contain therein relates to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A

The Jt. CIT, (OSD), Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Sheetal Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue , so far as Ground no

ITA 523/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2012-13 Jt.Cit (Osd) Sheetal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4(1)(1) V. 25, 4Th Floor Ahmedabad Shukan Mall Nr.Rajasthan Hospital Shahibaug, Ahmedabad-380054 Gujarat Pan: Aaics 9312 A अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" य "" यथ" "" य "" य थ" थ"/ (Respondent) थ" Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Ramit Kocharthis Appeal Filed By Revenue Is Directed Against The Appellate Order Dated 22/01/2019 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-8, [“Cit(A)” In Short] Under Section 250 Of Sub-Section (6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961(Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Assessment Year 2012-13(Appeal No. Cit(A)-8/168/15-16), The Appellate Proceedings Have Arisen Before Ld. Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated Jt.Cit(Osd) V. Sheetal Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Ay 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate and Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 254(2)Section 40A(3)

have observed that there was a search and seizure operation conducted by Revenue in the case of assesse on 29.08.2008, and there were certain documents seized by Revenue. It is observed that vide seized document /Annexure-6 at page Nos.55-59/ being seized from the office of the assessee-company