← 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

M/S Shivdhara Property Venture Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 810/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.810/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Shivdhara Property Venture Pvt. Ltd. ………. Appellant (Pan: Aarcs0501L) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Kolkata ………… Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Appeared For Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Appeared For Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : 10.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : 14.08.2024 Order Per Dr. Manish Borad: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year (In Short “Ay”) 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Revision Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Short The “Act”) By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Kolkata-2 [In Short Ld. “Pr. Cit”] Dated 28.03.2024 Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Framed U/S 153(A) Of The Act By Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata Dated 13.04.2021. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Read As Under:

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 263

making an addition of Rs.3,54,000/- being filing fees for increase in authorized capital debited in the Profit and Loss account when no incriminating material or document was found during the search for the relevant assessment year and assessment was not abated. 2. For that the Ld. PCIT erred ... were part of regular books of accounts in respect of an unabated assessment where no addition was made by AO in absence of any incriminating material. 3. For that the Ld. PCIT erred in passing the revisionary order when the AO himself had considered the aspect that no disallowance

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Marsh Fincom Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1342/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1342/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Aurangabad. Vs. Marsh Fincom Pvt. Ltd., 9Th Floor, Gold Crest, Ns Road No.10, Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400049. Pan : Aabck0760B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.09.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)-12, Pune For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts By Quashing Proceedings U/S. 153A In Respect Of Assessee Where The Assessee’S Case Was Covered Under Section 132 Of The Act Dated 20.08.2014. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Ao Has Made

For Appellant: Shri Deepak ShahFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the AO has made 2 addition without any incriminating materials found during the search whereas Shri Sandeep Jhaveri one of the directors of the assessee during the course of statement u/s 132(4) dated ... circumstances of the case and in law, the statement of one of the directors Shri Sandeep Jhaveri may not come in the category of incriminating materials. 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that

Sh. Saranjit Singh, Patiala vs. ACIT, Central Circle -2, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 384/CHANDI/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 381 & 382/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Shamsher Singh, Vs. The Acit बनाम Central Circle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Singh Chandigarh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahjps3586P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 383 & 384/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Vs. The Acit Saranjit Singh, बनाम Centralcircle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Chandigarh Singh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amwps9575J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Hearing )

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, CA and Shri Vir Sain Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that no incriminating material except the loose sheet relating to the unaccounted investment of Rs.45,00,000/- (1/4 share of assessee out of total investment of Rs.16000000/-) in House ... addition can be made by the AO in an assessment carried out u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search action. He has further relied upon various case laws to contend that the report of the DVO cannot be construed

Sh. Saranjit Singh, Patiala vs. ACIT, Central Circle -2, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 383/CHANDI/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 381 & 382/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Shamsher Singh, Vs. The Acit बनाम Central Circle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Singh Chandigarh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahjps3586P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 383 & 384/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Vs. The Acit Saranjit Singh, बनाम Centralcircle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Chandigarh Singh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amwps9575J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Hearing )

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, CA and Shri Vir Sain Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that no incriminating material except the loose sheet relating to the unaccounted investment of Rs.45,00,000/- (1/4 share of assessee out of total investment of Rs.16000000/-) in House ... addition can be made by the AO in an assessment carried out u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search action. He has further relied upon various case laws to contend that the report of the DVO cannot be construed

Sh. Shamsher Singh, Patiala vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 382/CHANDI/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 381 & 382/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Shamsher Singh, Vs. The Acit बनाम Central Circle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Singh Chandigarh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahjps3586P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 383 & 384/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Vs. The Acit Saranjit Singh, बनाम Centralcircle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Chandigarh Singh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amwps9575J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Hearing )

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, CA and Shri Vir Sain Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that no incriminating material except the loose sheet relating to the unaccounted investment of Rs.45,00,000/- (1/4 share of assessee out of total investment of Rs.16000000/-) in House ... addition can be made by the AO in an assessment carried out u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search action. He has further relied upon various case laws to contend that the report of the DVO cannot be construed

Sh. Shamsher Singh, Patiala vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeals of the assessees stand allowed

ITA 381/CHANDI/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Aug 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 381 & 382/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Shamsher Singh, Vs. The Acit बनाम Central Circle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Singh Chandigarh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ahjps3586P अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 383 & 384/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2011-12 Vs. The Acit Saranjit Singh, बनाम Centralcircle-2, 11-A, Gen Chanda Chandigarh Singh Colony, Patiala 147001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Amwps9575J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Hearing )

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, CA and Shri Vir Sain Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 250

have heard the rival contentions and gone through the record. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that no incriminating material except the loose sheet relating to the unaccounted investment of Rs.45,00,000/- (1/4 share of assessee out of total investment of Rs.16000000/-) in House ... addition can be made by the AO in an assessment carried out u/s 153A of the Income Tax Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the search action. He has further relied upon various case laws to contend that the report of the DVO cannot be construed

Samuel Paul Dhinakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 1177/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1176/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Smt. Evangeline Paul Dhinakaran Dcit बनाम/ #7, Jeevarathinam Nagar, Adyar, Central Circle-3(1) Vs. Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajpd-2491-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1177/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Samuel Paul Dhinakaran Dcit बनाम/ #7, Jeevarathinam Nagar, Adyar, Central Circle-3(1) Vs. Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Atspd-8564-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(3)(i)Section 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)

failed to note that the question of levy of penalty u/s 270A does not arise when no addition was made based on any incriminating material found during the search. 4. The CIT(A) erred in holding that residential status was disclosed on the basis of search finding. He failed ... return of income and voluntarily admitted income of Rs.45.44 Lacs. Further, due taxes were paid on the same. It was also submitted that no incriminating material was found during search. 3. However Ld. AO noted that the assessee was showing his status as non-resident consistently and did not disclose

Evangeline Paul Dhinakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 1176/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1176/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Smt. Evangeline Paul Dhinakaran Dcit बनाम/ #7, Jeevarathinam Nagar, Adyar, Central Circle-3(1) Vs. Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajpd-2491-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1177/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Samuel Paul Dhinakaran Dcit बनाम/ #7, Jeevarathinam Nagar, Adyar, Central Circle-3(1) Vs. Chennai-600 020. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Atspd-8564-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(3)(i)Section 270A(9)Section 270A(9)(a)

failed to note that the question of levy of penalty u/s 270A does not arise when no addition was made based on any incriminating material found during the search. 4. The CIT(A) erred in holding that residential status was disclosed on the basis of search finding. He failed ... return of income and voluntarily admitted income of Rs.45.44 Lacs. Further, due taxes were paid on the same. It was also submitted that no incriminating material was found during search. 3. However Ld. AO noted that the assessee was showing his status as non-resident consistently and did not disclose