← 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

Narasimmaraj Varadhan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the four assessment years 2016-17 to 2019-20 are allowed

ITA 561/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 560, 561, 562 & 563/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Narasimmaraj Varadhan, Assistant Commissioner Of Jagadisan & Co., V. Income Tax, Chartered Accountants Central Circle -3, Residency Apartments, Coimbatore – 641 018. New No. 245, Old No. 108, T.T.K Road, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaepn-4973-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : None : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2024

For Appellant: None
Section 132Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 153CSection 234A

under: “1. The CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C on the specious ground that alleged incriminating materials are found in the premises of JPRI Hotels de-hors the survey u/s.133A in the appellant's premises. 2. The CIT(A) is not justified ... time limit for filing a return u/s.153C in respect of search and seized proceedings is a supervening impossibility for compliance when benefit of alleged incriminating materials were not made available to the appellant to take cognizance thereof in the return of income being filed

Narasimmaraj Varadhan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 3, Coimbatore

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for all the four assessment years 2016-17 to 2019-20 are allowed

ITA 560/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 560, 561, 562 & 563/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Narasimmaraj Varadhan, Assistant Commissioner Of Jagadisan & Co., V. Income Tax, Chartered Accountants Central Circle -3, Residency Apartments, Coimbatore – 641 018. New No. 245, Old No. 108, T.T.K Road, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018. [Pan: Aaepn-4973-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : None : Shri. V. Nandakumar, Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2024

For Appellant: None
Section 132Section 133ASection 133A(3)Section 153CSection 234A

under: “1. The CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153C on the specious ground that alleged incriminating materials are found in the premises of JPRI Hotels de-hors the survey u/s.133A in the appellant's premises. 2. The CIT(A) is not justified ... time limit for filing a return u/s.153C in respect of search and seized proceedings is a supervening impossibility for compliance when benefit of alleged incriminating materials were not made available to the appellant to take cognizance thereof in the return of income being filed

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Alba Industries Limited, Chennai

ITA 284/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.282 To 287/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20 & Cross-Objection Nos.20 To 25/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20 The Acit, Central Circle-1, Madurai-625 002. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. M/S. Alba Industries Ltd., No.32/2, Halls Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. [Pan: Aabcb 5758 J] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent / Objector) Cross- Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate 04.09.2024 26.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & The Cross-Objections By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of The Appellate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai [In Short 'Cit(A)'] In Relation To The Assessment Orders All Dated 27.08.2021 Passed U/S 143(3)/153A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [In Short `The Act'] For The

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

separately objected to the validity of the income-tax assessment framed u/s 153A of the Act on the ground that, there was no incriminating material unearthed in the course of search. 6. We have heard both the parties, perused the findings of the lower authorities and considered the material placed ... before us. The legal plea raised by the assessee in all the AYs before us was that, in absence of any incriminating material found in the course of search, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A of the Act by the AO was invalid rendering the impugned orders to be void

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Alba Industries Limited, Chennai

ITA 282/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.282 To 287/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20 & Cross-Objection Nos.20 To 25/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2019-20 The Acit, Central Circle-1, Madurai-625 002. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. M/S. Alba Industries Ltd., No.32/2, Halls Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. [Pan: Aabcb 5758 J] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent / Cross- Objector) Department By : Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By : Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & The Cross-Objections By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of The Appellate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai [In Short 'Cit(A)'] In Relation To The Assessment Orders All Dated 27.08.2021 Passed U/S 143(3)/153A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [In Short `The Act'] For The

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

separately objected to the validity of the income-tax assessment framed u/s 153A of the Act on the ground that, there was no incriminating material unearthed in the course of search. 6. We have heard both the parties, perused the findings of the lower authorities and considered the material placed ... before us. The legal plea raised by the assessee in all the AYs before us was that, in absence of any incriminating material found in the course of search, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A of the Act by the AO was invalid rendering the impugned orders to be void

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Beach Minerals Sands Company, Tirunelveli

ITA 1475/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1473 To 1475/Chny/2023 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2017-18 & Cross-Objection Nos. 28 To 30/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2015-16 To 2017-18 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.13 & 14/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 & Cross-Objection Nos. 26 & 27/Chny/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Acit, Central Circle-1, Madurai-625 002. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. M/S.Beach Minerals Sands Co, 132, Tiruchendur Road, Kuttam, Tirunelveli-627 651. [Pan: Aacfb 5680 P] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent / Cross- Objector) Department By : Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit Assessee By : Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: These Appeals Preferred By The Revenue & The Cross-Objections By The Assessee Are Arising Out Of The Appellate Orders Passed By The Learned

For Appellant: Mr. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Nos.26 & 27/Chny/2024 (AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15) M/s.Beach Minerals Sands Co. :: 6 :: u/s 153A of the Act on the ground that there was no incriminating material unearthed in the course of search. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the findings of the lower authorities and considered the material ... placed before us. The legal plea raised by the assessee in all the AYs before us was that, in absence of any incriminating material found in the course of search, the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 153A of the Act by the AO was invalid rendering the impugned orders