“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

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 800/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.799 To 805/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15, 2016-17 To 2020-21 V. M/S. Metal Impex, The Acit, The Lattice, 4Th Floor, Central Circle-1(1), No.20 Waddles Road, Chennai. Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [Pan: Aamfm 4856 G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

searched year and therefore the AO could have validly issued notice u/s 153C of the Act only when he had in his possession, any incriminating material, which revealed that income represented in the form of ‘asset’ valued at Rs.50,00,000/- or more, had escaped assessment ... Metal Impex :: 8 :: this AY was unsustainable, since it was not based on any incriminating material found in the course of search. The Ld. AR relying upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Sinhgad Technical Education Society

M/S Metal Impex, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 799/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(2)Section 68

Babu Lal Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 179/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &

Section 115BSection 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153CSection 250Section 68

other cases, in addition to the income that has already been assessed, the assessment u/s 153A will be made on the basis of incriminating material, which in the context of relevant provisions means — (i) books of account , other documents, found in the course of search but not produced ... Supreme Court on 7-12- 2015) wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has reiterated the above settled legal proposition that since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search, no additions could have been made to the income already assessed .... Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel

Babu Lal Sharma, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153CSection 250Section 68

other cases, in addition to the income that has already been assessed, the assessment u/s 153A will be made on the basis of incriminating material, which in the context of relevant provisions means – (i) books of account , other documents, found in the course of search but not produced ... Supreme Court on 7-12- 2015) wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has reiterated the above settled legal proposition that since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search, no additions could have been made to the income already assessed ……………….. Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. Sh. Naval Kishore, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 456/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Section 139Section 143Section 153A

therefore has no binding evidentiary value. The argument of the appellant is considered but not found to be acceptable. There is clear detection of incriminating material during the search proceedings. Incriminating documents was seized from the premises of Shri Surender Pan Singh Sahni & Other associates. The search team immediately confronted ... offered u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act. Therefore claim of the appellant is incorrect that regular books of accounts were maintained. #### 6.5.6 Incriminating Material Found during search It is argued that The AO may frame assessment orders either u/s. 153G or u/s. 147 of the Act as the case

Naval Kishore, Kota vs. ACIT DCIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed and that

ITA 205/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka (CIT)

Section 139Section 143Section 153ASection 234ASection 68

therefore has no binding evidentiary value. The argument of the appellant is considered but not found to be acceptable. There is clear detection of incriminating material during the search proceedings. Incriminating documents was seized from the premises of Shri Surender Pan Singh Sahni & Other associates. The search team immediately confronted ... offered u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act. Therefore claim of the appellant is incorrect that regular books of accounts were maintained. 6.5.6 Incriminating Material Found during search It is argued that The AO may frame assessment orders either u/s. 153G or u/s. 147 of the Act as the case

DCIT(CC)-2(4), Mumbai vs. Renudevi Hisaria, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1268/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 147Section 153ASection 68

under consideration i.e., AY 2015-16 in ITA No. 1287/Mum/2021 had deleted the addition in quantum on the legal issue of there being no incriminating material found during the course of search relating to alleged bogus long term capital gain on penny stock. Ld. AO had made addition towards commission

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-5(1), Mumbai. vs. Ekjyot Properties, Mumbai

ITA 3107/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Jaiprakash BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR

Section 132Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

alleged on money received on sale of flats, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case that there was sufficient incriminating material in the form of loose papers, excel sheet entries and statements recorded during the search and post search proceeding to establish that the assessee has received cash ... brokerage/commission paid in cash to the brokers on sale of flats, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case that there was sufficient incriminating material in the form of loose papers, excel sheet entries, whatsapp chats and statements recorded during the search and post search proceeding to establish that

Govardhan Naidu Gummalla, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 170/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Hon'Bleआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.169 & 170/Hyd/2023 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2019-20) Shri Govardhan Naidu Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Gummalla, Central Circle 2(2) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Actpg9082B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 26/09/2024 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Of The Learned Cit (A)-12 Hyderabad Dated 09/02/2023 & Pertains To A.Ys 2018-19 & 2019-20 Respectively. Since Facts Are Identical & Common Issues Are Involved In These Two Appeals, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR

Section 10Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

assessee is on the legality of additions made in the assessment order passed u/s 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961, in absence of incriminating material. The learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT vs. Abhisar Buildwell ... reported in (2023) 454 ITR 212 submitted that in absence of incriminating material found during the search, no addition can be made in unabated assessment. Since the assessment herein, in question, is unabated as on the date of search, the addition made by the Assessing Officer should be deleted

Govardhan Naidu Gummalla, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 169/HYD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR

Section 10Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Rajahmundry vs. L V Beach City Property Promoters, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 254/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 254/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) Asst. Cit – Central Circle – 2 V. L.V. Beach City Property Promoters 40-25-19/A, Balaji Towers 5Th Floor, Shiva Towers Kogantivari Street, Patamatalanka Danavaipeta, Rajahmundry-533103 Vijayawada – 520010 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfl5214D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) सी.ओ सं. / C.O. No. 3/Viz/2024 [आयकअपीलसं. से उत्पन्न / Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.254/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19)] L.V. Beach City Property Promoters V. Asst. Cit – Central Circle – 2 40-25-19/A, Balaji Towers 5Th Floor, Shiva Towers Kogantivari Street, Patamatalanka Danavaipeta, Rajahmundry-533103 Vijayawada – 520010 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aacfl5214D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व / Assessee Represented By : Shri M.V. Prasad, Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व / Department Represented By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

were found and seized vide annexures UPF/RP/EL/1 to 155. Assessing Officer observed that during the course of post search proceedings, on the basis of incriminating material evidencing unaccounted transactions of the firm found and seized, Sri VV Balakrishna Rao, partner of the firm, has voluntarily admitted additional income of Rs.2 ... income under section 153A of the Act the assessee firm has not disclosed the additional income consequent to search. Assessing Officer on verification of incriminating material seized, worked out the unaccounted income of Rs. Rs.9,00,90,090/- and issued a show cause notice dated 11.03.2022 requesting the assessee

DCIT, Central Circle2(4), Chennai vs. S. Elambharathi, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos

ITA 221/CHNY/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

search in the group cases of M/s. SRS Mining on 08.12.2016 is the same in the present case also. The Coordinate Bench examined the incriminating material as found in search, satisfaction note and decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 34626 of 2018, held that ... department u/s 132 in group cases of M/s SRS mining and its partners on 08-12-2016. During the course of search action, certain incriminating material was found which was marked as ANN/MPK/NS/B&D/S-19 and 20 and_ANN/KGRA/MPKSSR/B&D/S-1_to_3 from the premises of M/s SRS mining. During the course

DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai vs. Shri S. Elembharathi, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cos filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 220/CHNY/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.220 & 221/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 & C.O. Nos. 7 & 8/Chny/2022 [In Ita Nos. 220 & 221/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shri S. Elambharathi, Income Tax, Central Circle -2 (4), Flat No. 5, Ground Floor, 364, Room No. B6, Investigation Building, Kurupam Court, Lloyds Road, No. 46, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. Chennai 34. [Pan: Aacpe3945N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri V. Nandakumar, Cit Assessee By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri P.M. Kathir, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: Both The Appeals & The Cross Objections Filed By The Revenue & The Assessee Respectively Are Directed Against The Common Order Dated 28.01.2022 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai For The Assessment Years 2015-16 & 2017-18. 2. Since The Issue Raised In The Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of The Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 3Section 68

search in the group cases of M/s. SRS Mining on 08.12.2016 is the same in the present case also. The Coordinate Bench examined the incriminating material as found in search, satisfaction note and decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 34626 of 2018, held that ... department u/s 132 in group cases of M/s SRS mining and its partners on 08-12-2016. During the course of search action, certain incriminating material was found which was marked as ANN/MPK/NS/B&D/S-19 and 20 and ANN/KGRA/MPKSSR/B&D/S-1 to 3 from the premises of M/s SRS mining. During

Sankalp Recreation Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 576/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 69C

seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act on 30-10-2018 at the premises of the Kailash Goenka Group. The search revealed incriminating materials in the form of handwritten diaries, loose papers, and bills, indicating substantial unaccounted receipts from the hotel and restaurant businesses, as well as corresponding unaccounted ... learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the additions made by learned Assessing Officer without any incriminating material found during the search. 3. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in rejecting the books

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 569/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR &

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153ASection 36(1)(va)Section 69C

Sadhu Ram Balani, Indore vs. ITO-5(1), Indore

ITA 470/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Indore24 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanisadhu Ram Balani Ito-5(1) Flat No.B-503, Moti Mahal Indore Apartment 28-A, Sector-C Vs. Scheme No.71, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Abspb5367L Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.09.2024

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 133A

accommodation entry. The AO in the entire assessment order has not made reference to single documentary evidence which can be said to be an incriminating material against the assessee to show that the assessee has availed accommodation entry of bogus Long Term Capital Gain. Therefore, the mere suspicion cannot

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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 89/HYD/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT, DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

appeal of the assessee, Revenue preferred this appeal. 2. At the outset, the argument of the learned AR is that when there is no incriminating material found during the search in case of a concluded assessment, no addition could be made. According to him, authorities below failed to appreciate ... well settled principle under section 153A of the Act that the jurisdiction to make assessment for a concluded assessment is limited to incriminating material found during the course of search. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the latest decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court

Zula Merchandisc Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 553/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Section 68

details of purchase and sales of shares alongwith contract notes for purchase and sale, D-mat A/C and bank statement and furthermore no incriminating materials were found against the assessee in the survey conducted in the premises of the assessee and therefore the AO could not deny the claim ... survey on the assessee’s premises and AO relied on the statements of entry providers which were recorded long ago. Besides there was no incriminating materials against the assessee found even in the premises of entry operators/stock brokers. Therefore this case also squarely applies to the facts of the case

Magendra Singh Rathore, Alwar vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 483/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargiya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 57

that in case of abated assessments the assessment is not restricted in scope and the assessing authority can make the addition even without any incriminating material found during the search. Thus there is no need to go into the merits of the argument of the appellant regarding the nature

Magendra Singh Rathore, Alwar vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 460/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargiya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 57