← 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

Smt. Manjit Kaur, Mohali vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are

ITA 246/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively. The Department was unable to lay its hand on any incriminating material, however it has made addition of agriculture income declared by the assessee. A perusal of the record would indicate that assessee has declared agriculture ... assessee. 5. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. It is pertinent to note that no incriminating material was found during the course of search. The search was carried out on 13.02.2019. The time limit to issue notice under Section 143(2) for scrutinizing

Smt. Manjit Kaur, Mohali vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are

ITA 245/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively. The Department was unable to lay its hand on any incriminating material, however it has made addition of agriculture income declared by the assessee. A perusal of the record would indicate that assessee has declared agriculture ... assessee. 5. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. It is pertinent to note that no incriminating material was found during the course of search. The search was carried out on 13.02.2019. The time limit to issue notice under Section 143(2) for scrutinizing

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata vs. Southwinds Project LLP, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 169/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

assessment year. Appellant has cited several judicial decisions which have held that additions in search assessment could not be made in respect of any incriminating material not found during search in the case of un-abated/completed assessment. Nature of additions in the current year reveals that the decisions ... shall abate. But, an assessment under the section 153A has to be made only on the basis of seized materials. In absence of any incriminating materials, the completed assessment can be only reiterated and assessment can be made only in respect of abated assessment or re-assessment. Completed assessment

ITO Ward 3(4), Thane vs. Sunil Kumar Bagaria, Thane

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalito, Ward-3(4), Room No.9, B-Wing, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Wagle Industrial Estate, ............... Appellant Thane West - 400604

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar G. Subramanyam, Sr.DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(4)

under section 68 and section 69C of the Act. The learned CIT(A) held that the AO has not established that there was any incriminating material pertaining to the assessee specifying his role in the manipulation of scrip of Tilak Venture Ltd. or even arranging accommodation entries. The learned

Marie Products Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 7, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 771/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik, CIT
Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh

Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav, Pune vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2144/PUN/2024[AY 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Central Circle 2(1), Vs. Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Dcit, Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Vs. Central Circle 2(1), Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Cit & Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23-01-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – CIT and Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245DSection 245D(4)Section 245HSection 271(1)(c)

levying penalty on notional income of house property amounting to Rs.3,88,920, without appreciating that the said "income" was not part of any incriminating material & as such, the same could not have been assessed at the 153A stage by the learned AO. It is further contended, learned AO devised ... said buffer income on the surmises/assumption/presumption that, the buffer income as in fact concealed income, despite the factum of absence of any relevant incriminating material. 11. Appellant craves leave to add/alter/delete/ modify, all/ any of the above grounds of appeal. 17. The Ld. DR at the outset challenged the order

DCIT, CC-2(1), Pune vs. Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1307/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Central Circle 2(1), Vs. Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vinod Ramchandra Jadhav Dcit, Plot No.42-44, Green Park Society, Vs. Central Circle 2(1), Pune Viman Nagar, Pune – 411014 Pan: Aanpj0592P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Cit & Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 23-01-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21-04-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – CIT and Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245DSection 245D(4)Section 245HSection 271(1)(c)

levying penalty on notional income of house property amounting to Rs.3,88,920, without appreciating that the said "income" was not part of any incriminating material & as such, the same could not have been assessed at the 153A stage by the learned AO. It is further contended, learned AO devised ... said buffer income on the surmises/assumption/presumption that, the buffer income as in fact concealed income, despite the factum of absence of any relevant incriminating material. 11. Appellant craves leave to add/alter/delete/ modify, all/ any of the above grounds of appeal. 17. The Ld. DR at the outset challenged the order

Sen Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2376/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Somnath GhoshFor Respondent: Ms. MadhumitaDas, Addl.CIT
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 69C

framed u/s.153C r.w.s.143(3) of the Act as there was exclusive provisions provided in the Act to deal with the cases where some incriminating material found qua the assessee during the course of search on the third party and, therefore, the assessment framed by the AO u/s.143 ... contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that undisputedly the basis for initiation of proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.148 of the Act was the incriminating material seized during the course of search on third party namely M/s Majee Group conducted on 05.11.2020 and, therefore, the assessment framed u/s.143

M/S. Bharat Beedi Works Private Limited, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the four A

ITA 645/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Respondent: Shri E. Shridhar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

impugned AY 2018-19 without appreciating that no addition can be made in respect of completed/unabated assessments in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 7. As regards assessment proceedings being bad as there is no valid return in response to notice under Section 153A ... very same income declared in the revised return. The AO thereafter issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and based on the alleged incriminating material evidences detected during the course of search, the assessments has been made on the assessee by estimating huge incomes. 3. In respect

M/S. Bharat Beedi Works Private Limited, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the four A

ITA 644/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Respondent: Shri E. Shridhar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

impugned AY 2018-19 without appreciating that no addition can be made in respect of completed/unabated assessments in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 7. As regards assessment proceedings being bad as there is no valid return in response to notice under Section 153A ... very same income declared in the revised return. The AO thereafter issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and based on the alleged incriminating material evidences detected during the course of search, the assessments has been made on the assessee by estimating huge incomes. 3. In respect

M/S. Bharat Beedi Works Private Limited, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commisioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2, Mangaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the four A

ITA 643/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Respondent: Shri E. Shridhar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

impugned AY 2018-19 without appreciating that no addition can be made in respect of completed/unabated assessments in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. 7. As regards assessment proceedings being bad as there is no valid return in response to notice under Section 153A ... very same income declared in the revised return. The AO thereafter issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act and based on the alleged incriminating material evidences detected during the course of search, the assessments has been made on the assessee by estimating huge incomes. 3. In respect

M/S. Bharat Beedi Works Private Limited, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2(1), Mangaluru

ITA 642/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Respondent: Shri Chythanya .K, Sr
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

very same income declared in the revised return. The AO thereafter issued notice u/s.143(2) of the Act and based on the alleged incriminating material evidences detected during the course of search, the assessments has been made on the assessee by estimating huge incomes. 3. In respect ... 26/02/2020. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had disputed the addition made based on the statement given u/s.132(4) when there is no incriminating materials available. The assessee further submitted that the authorities had made the additions based on the loose sheets without any corroborative evidence and therefore the said

M/S. Kishor D Naik (HUF), Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -2, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 5587/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 292C

group” though it was not directly covered under the search action. The Assessing Officer recorded satisfaction required u/s 153C of the Act that certain incriminating material pertaining to the assessee was found during the search in other cases of the ‘Swastik' group and the Assessing Officer being same ... looked at in this regard and respondent cannot seek to augment, supplement or add to materials recorded to support the claim that incriminating material has been found. Further respondent cannot refer to any other documents or material to establish such a claim. We find support in (i) Ananta Landmark

(Late) Audinarayana Reddy Althuri Rep.by L/R Mahesh Reddy Althuri, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 39/HYD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA D K ChhablaniFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 10(38)Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s.153A of the Act on two folds and contended that, in absence of any incriminating material found as a result of search, no addition can be made in the assessment framed under section 153A of the Act. The assessee further ... from A Mahesh Reddy in the case of AMR India Limited. Further, the said material relied upon by the Assessing Officer does not constitute incriminating material found as a result of search and consequently, the addition made by the Assessing Officer in absence of any incriminating material cannot be sustained

Singanamala Sarala, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 200/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, C.AFor Respondent: : Ms. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 153DSection 263Section 269S

search and seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was conducted in the case of M/s. Suresh Productions group on 27.11.2019, wherein certain incriminating materials pertaining to the assessee were seized. Consequently, notice u/s.153C of the Act was issued to the assessee. In the assessment order passed in consequence

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle1-(2), Hyderabad vs. M/S. Vpr Mining Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee

ITA 90/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri S K Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 153A

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

Shiv Milk Products, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3), Meerut

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2342/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Shri Salil AggarwaL, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 153A(1)Section 153CSection 153C(1)

which assessments can be completed in the case of ‘other person’ stands settled that it is from the date of handing over of incriminating material and recording of the satisfaction the block assessments periods have to be determined. On the admitted facts, it comes up that notices u/s 153C were

Grade One Events Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ghaziabad

In the result, the captioned appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 1831/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraa.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17 A.Y. 2017-18 A.Y. 2019-20 A.Y. 2018-19

Section 24Section 263Section 263(1)

Said order, either uploaded on ITBA Portal or issued in physical, was illegal being additions made in said assessment order was nowhere based upon incriminating material unearthed during the course of impugned search operation conducted u/s 132 of the act, whereas, incriminating material is a pre-requisite for framing assessment

Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Cicle- 5(1), New Delhi

ITA 4850/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

evidence" used in section 132(4) of the Act cannot be treated as "as evidence" when statement u/s 132(4) made while confronting with incriminating material gathered during the search operations. 8. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the Assessing Officer should have conducted further enquiry to find ... alleged creditors will not be sufficient to draw an adverse inference against the assessee. 24. It is further seen that no incriminating material was brought on record pertaining to the year under appeal from which it could be held that the loans taken by the assessee are not genuine

Kalpana Dilip Mehta As Legal Heir of Dilip Dalpatlal Mehta, Walkeshwar vs. ACIT 19(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 679/MUM/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Kalpana Dilip Mehta As Legal Heir Of Acit 19(1), Dilip Dalpatlal Mehta, Piramal Chambers Vs. 51 Anupam Society, Manav Mandir Mumbai-400012. Road, Walkeshwar, Mumbai-400006. Pan No. Aacpm 4426 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Suchek Anchaliya, CA a/wFor Respondent: 25/03/2025
Section 1Section 143(2)Section 147

response to the reference made to Swiss Competent Authority. No incriminating made to Swiss Competent Authority. No incriminating made to Swiss Competent Authority. No incriminating material whatsoever has been found during the course of t material whatsoever has been found during the course of t material whatsoever has been found