“incriminating material”

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Usha Sharma, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2019-20 Revelation Unique Retail & Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Marketing Private Ltd., Tax, Central Circle-3, 5A/3A, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi New Delhi Pin: 1100 02 Pan :Aaicr9933L (Appellant) (Respondent)

void ab initio; 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case no addition can be made in the absence of any incriminating material found on record; 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in sustaining the order ... case of Royal Multiplex (P) Ltd. vs ACIT, ITA Nos.3455 to 3460/Del/2023. 5.1 No addition can be made in the absence of any incriminating material found on record;  The very foundation of the assessment proceedings in the present case is untenable in law, as neither the satisfaction note

Nitin Goel, Ghaziabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2)(5), Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal

associates on 23.07.2019. Various documents/books of accounts etc. were found and seized and statements of various persons were recorded. It was found that some incriminating material found and seized contained some entries related to the assessee. Subsequently, satisfactions were recorded by AO of the searched person as well ... proceedings or assumption of jurisdiction is concerned. 49. That takes us to the principal question and which pertains to the nature of the incriminating material that may be obtained and the years forming part of the block which would merit being thrown open. Regard must be had to the fact

Manoj Kumar Sharma, Delhi vs. Assesing Officer, Delhi

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2008-09 With Assessment Year: 2010-11 With Assessment Year: 2011-12 With Assessment Year: 2012-13 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 Vs. Dcit, Mrs. Shikha Tiwari, D-203, Sector-47, Central Circle, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Noida Pan: Bbdps3697A (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Mrs. Shikha Tiwari, Central Circle, D-203, Sector-47, Noida Noida, Uttar Pradesh Pan: Bbdps3697A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Shivam Kukreja, Adv. Sh. Divyansh Dubey, Adv. Department By Ms. Suman Malik, Cit(Dr)

cash purchases which were claimed as gifted from her father to her whose details are nowhere forthcoming so as to be treated as any incriminating material. We thus see merit in the assessee’s instant former four appeals ITA Nos.2851, 2852, 2853 & 2854/Del/2018 challenging the learned lower authorities

Shilak Ram, Haryana vs. ITO Ward 4, Rohtak

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.3311 To 3313/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2008-09 To 2010-11) Dinesh Kumar, Dcit, 407, Nilgiri Apartments, Central Circle-07, Alaknanda, New Delhi-110019. Vs. New Delhi. Pan-Aiopg3637K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nirbhay Mehta, Adv. Department By Shri Mahesh Kumar, Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing 15.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: All These Three Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Three Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [Cit(A) In Short] All Are Dated 20.03.2025 For Assessment Years 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Respectively.

Kabul Chawla reported in 380 ITR 173 (Del.) wherein it is held that no addition u/s 153A could be made in absence of incriminating material. Thereafter, the AO passed the impugned order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 254 dated 23.03.2024 wherein the AO has again made the addition ... aside order dated 27.09.2022 that the only issue which is to be examined by the AO is the availability of any incriminating material found during the course of search Vis-a Vis to the addition as per the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case

Maksat Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 16(1), Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. M. Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 M/S Trenchless Engineering Vs. Dcit Services Private Limited Central Circle – 06 C-185, 2Nd Floor Phase-Ii, New Delhi Mayapuri, Delhi 110064 Pan No. Aabct3284 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

failing to quash the assessment order, which is passed in consequence of proceedings that were initiated and concluded without the possession of any incriminating material apart from loose excel sheets. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by failing to delete the addition

Paramasivam Mahalingam, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

completed much before the date of search i.e. 28.11.2018 and therefore, the said assessment is completed assessment. Since no incriminating material was found during the course of search, the addition made was liable to be deleted. Relevant paragraps of the appellate order of AY 2013-14 is reproduced as under ... Therefore, the assessment year under appeal is a completed assessment. From the examination of the assessment order it is apparent that no incriminating material was found during the course of search action qua the aforesaid disallowance. The appellant has placed reliance on the ratio of the decision