← All Phrases

“incriminating material”

Search & SeizureSection 153ASection 153A8,981 judgments

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

Leading authorities on incriminating material

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. 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.

Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd.
387 ITR 529 · 2016 · High Court
670
citing judgments

Assessments under Section 153A cannot be sustained without any incriminating material found during the search that substantiates the additions. This principle applies even to completed assessments where no additional income is disclosed.

Judgments citing incriminating material

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-16, Delhi vs. Bharat Bhushan Suri, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2957/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.2957/Del/2023, A.Y. 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Bharat Bhushan Suri Tax, Central Circle-16, E-248, Greater Kailash I, E-2, Jhandewalan Extn. New Delhi Ara Centre, Delhi Pan: Ahnpp6394A New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Mr. Javed Akhtar, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Sh. Deepanshu Mehta, Advocate Date Of Hearing 27/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal If The Revenue For The Assessment Year (Hereinafter, The ‘Ay’) 2017-18 Filed Is Directed Against The Order Dated 02.08.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, New Delhi [Hereinafter, The ‘Cit(A)’].

Section 132Section 153CSection 69A

hereinafter the ‘Act’) was carried out in the case of Rakesh Jain Group of cases on 02.11.2017. During the search proceedings, various incriminating material including digital data were seized. The Assessing Officer (AO) of searched person noticed that certain information in the 2 Bharat Bhushan Suri seized material ... mention the name of the assessee nor the property details; hence, such seized material could not be used against the assessee as incriminating material. Such document was claimed as nothing but dumb document. The agreement to sell mentioned the name of Sh. Amit Vaid as vendor and not the assessee

Krupalu Metals P. Ltd., Jamnagar vs. The NFAC Delhi, Delhi

ITA 111/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot22 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.111 To 113/Rjt/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16 Krupalu Metals Pvt. Ltd Income Tax Officer, बनाम / National Faceless Assessment Plot No..4345, Gidc, Phase- Vs. Centre, Delhi/Dcit, Circle-3, Iii, Udhyog Nagar, Jamnagar Jamnagar-361008 स्थायी लेखा सं/. जीआइआर सं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aadck6122 B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sarvesh Gohil, Ld. Ar राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 27/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/05/2025 Per Bench: आदेश / Order Captioned Three Appeals, Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh Gohil, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr-DR
Section 147Section 250

findings of the search action, by way of the SCN dated 30.03.2016 issued by the Central Excise Authority. along with copies of the incriminating material, including copies of the statements of buyers. The response of the appellant to the said SCN, by way of written and oral submissions, was duly ... another plea that there was no basis for making the addition in respect of the balance amount under section 69, in absence of any incriminating material. In the present case, AO has made addition on account of unexplained investment under section 69, towards purchase of raw material and manufacturing expenditure

Surinder Singh Ryait, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

The appeal stand allowed accordingly

ITA 154/CHANDI/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.153/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ms. Amarjeet Kaur Ryait Acit # 224-H Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar Central Circle-Ii बनाम/ Vs. Ludhiana-141012 Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abnpr-0576-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.154/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Surinder Singh Ryait Acit बनाम/ Vs. # 224-H Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar Central Circle-Ii Ludhiana-141012 Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abmpr-3196-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P.K. Goel (Ca) & Shri Sunil Arora (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-05-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Two Different Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Goel (CA) and Shri Sunil AroraFor Respondent: Ms. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

Apex Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (149 Taxmann.com 399) to submit that in the absence of any incriminating material, no such addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AR placed on record events chart to bolster ... Upon perusal of case records, it emerges that the regular return of income as filed by the assessee had attained finality. No incriminating material is shown to have been received from the assessee which would dislodge the claim of the assessee that the gains were bogus claim

Amarjeet Kaur Ryait, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, CC-II, Ludhiana

The appeal stand allowed accordingly

ITA 153/CHANDI/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.153/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ms. Amarjeet Kaur Ryait Acit # 224-H Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar Central Circle-Ii बनाम/ Vs. Ludhiana-141012 Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abnpr-0576-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.154/Chandi/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Surinder Singh Ryait Acit बनाम/ Vs. # 224-H Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar Central Circle-Ii Ludhiana-141012 Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abmpr-3196-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P.K. Goel (Ca) & Shri Sunil Arora (Advocate) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-05-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-05-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Two Different Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Have Identical Facts. First, We Take Up

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Goel (CA) and Shri Sunil AroraFor Respondent: Ms. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

Apex Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (149 Taxmann.com 399) to submit that in the absence of any incriminating material, no such addition could have been made in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AR placed on record events chart to bolster ... Upon perusal of case records, it emerges that the regular return of income as filed by the assessee had attained finality. No incriminating material is shown to have been received from the assessee which would dislodge the claim of the assessee that the gains were bogus claim