← 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

DCIT CC, 4(3), Mumbai vs. Nouveau Global Ventures Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes whereas cross statistical purposes whereas cross-objections of the assessee are of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3608/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Mr. Ashok Bansal, &For Respondent: Mr. S. Srinivasu, CIT-DR &
Section 153CSection 68

66/M/2024 2. The ld. CIT(A) 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that there were incriminat ing that there were incriminating material and, therefore, the completed assessment could have been disturbed. and, therefore, the completed assessment could have been disturbed. and, therefore, the completed assessment could have been ... dated 26.12.2016, the Assessing Officer referred to 143(3) of the Act dated 26.12.2016, the Assessing Officer referred to various incriminating material and statements of Shri R.K. Kedia, various incriminating material and statements of Shri R.K. Kedia, various incriminating material and statements of Shri R.K. Kedia, and Shri Manish Arora

Raja Udyog (P) Ltd., 24-Parganas (N) vs. ACIT, CC-4(3), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.(SS)A. No

ITA 944/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.944/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd…..…………….....……………………....………....Appellant Sukchar Girja, 16F, Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24 Parganas (N), W.B – 700115. [Pan: Aaccr0764P] Vs. Acit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent I.T.(Ss)A. No.43/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd…..…………….....……………………....………....Appellant Sukchar Girja, 16F, Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24 Parganas (N), W.B – 700115. [Pan: Aaccr0764P] Vs. Acit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent I.T.(Ss)A. No.44/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd…..…………….....……………………....………....Appellant Sukchar Girja, 16F, Barrackpore Trunk Road, 24 Parganas (N), W.B – 700115. [Pan: Aaccr0764P] Vs. Acit, Cc-4(3), Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rakesh Kr. Das, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 30, 2024

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

944/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Raja Udyog (P) Ltd Income Tax Act, 1961 to reassess income for completed assessments without having any incriminating material. The order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the AO under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and therefore need ... assessee against the assessment carried out u/s 153C of the Act is concerned, we find the said issue is not relating to incriminating material found during the search action. The Assessing Officer has simply taken the amount already assessed in the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S. Radha Radhav Developer, Nagpur

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 49/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

made the order impugned in these appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was based on or made with reference to any incriminating material or documents found in the course of search. There is no whisper/mention of any material leave alone any incriminating material seized during search ... assessments other than the invalid valuation report as discussed supra. The valuation report of DVO in the facts discussed cannot be held to be incriminating material, since it is not a fall out of any incriminating material unearthed during search to suggest any investment in building which is over

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S. Radha Madhav Developer, Nagpur

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 48/NAG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

made the order impugned in these appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was based on or made with reference to any incriminating material or documents found in the course of search. There is no whisper/mention of any material leave alone any incriminating material seized during search ... assessments other than the invalid valuation report as discussed supra. The valuation report of DVO in the facts discussed cannot be held to be incriminating material, since it is not a fall out of any incriminating material unearthed during search to suggest any investment in building which is over

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S. Radha Madhav Developer, Nagpur

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 47/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

made the order impugned in these appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was based on or made with reference to any incriminating material or documents found in the course of search. There is no whisper/mention of any material leave alone any incriminating material seized during search ... assessments other than the invalid valuation report as discussed supra. The valuation report of DVO in the facts discussed cannot be held to be incriminating material, since it is not a fall out of any incriminating material unearthed during search to suggest any investment in building which is over

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S. Radha Madhav Developer, Nagpur

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 140/NAG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

made the order impugned in these appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was based on or made with reference to any incriminating material or documents found in the course of search. There is no whisper/mention of any material leave alone any incriminating material seized during search ... assessments other than the invalid valuation report as discussed supra. The valuation report of DVO in the facts discussed cannot be held to be incriminating material, since it is not a fall out of any incriminating material unearthed during search to suggest any investment in building which is over

Asstt.Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Radha Madhav Developer, Nagpur

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 27/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

made the order impugned in these appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was based on or made with reference to any incriminating material or documents found in the course of search. There is no whisper/mention of any material leave alone any incriminating material seized during search ... assessments other than the invalid valuation report as discussed supra. The valuation report of DVO in the facts discussed cannot be held to be incriminating material, since it is not a fall out of any incriminating material unearthed during search to suggest any investment in building which is over

Asstt.Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Nagpur vs. M/S Radha Madhav Developer, Nagpur

In the result, all the six appeals preferred by the department are dismissed

ITA 26/NAG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 142ASection 145

made the order impugned in these appeals for assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was based on or made with reference to any incriminating material or documents found in the course of search. There is no whisper/mention of any material leave alone any incriminating material seized during search ... assessments other than the invalid valuation report as discussed supra. The valuation report of DVO in the facts discussed cannot be held to be incriminating material, since it is not a fall out of any incriminating material unearthed during search to suggest any investment in building which is over

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6(1)(1) Bangalore, Koramangala, Bengaluru vs. Shri Bommai Sommappa Basavaraj, Bangalore

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed, as not pressed

ITA 922/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 250(4)

with the requirement of the Indian Evidence Act and are not admissible evidence. o The loose sheets, scribbled note books cannot be treated as incriminating material unless they are corroborated with cogent evidences. o On the basis of diary recovered from a third party, the prosecution cannot establish the guilt ... during the course of appellate proceedings had directed the A.O. to grant an opportunity of cross examination of VP (Finance) RNSIL and inspect the incriminating material. The VP (Finance) RNSIL during the course of cross examination had outrightly denied making any payment by him or RNSIL to the assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-6(1)(1) Bangalore, Koramangala, Bengaluru vs. Shri Bommai Sommappa Basavaraj, Bangalore

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and CO filed by the assessee is dismissed, as not pressed

ITA 914/BANG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Chalapathy, CAFor Respondent: Shri
Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 250(4)

with the requirement of the Indian Evidence Act and are not admissible evidence. o The loose sheets, scribbled note books cannot be treated as incriminating material unless they are corroborated with cogent evidences. o On the basis of diary recovered from a third party, the prosecution cannot establish the guilt ... during the course of appellate proceedings had directed the A.O. to grant an opportunity of cross examination of VP (Finance) RNSIL and inspect the incriminating material. The VP (Finance) RNSIL during the course of cross examination had outrightly denied making any payment by him or RNSIL to the assessee

M/S. Concorde Housing Corporation Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 531/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 132Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

read with Explanation 5A of the Act without satisfying the pre-conditions, as the addition was made on Adhoc basis, in the absence of incriminating material, reliance is also placed on the Article 265 of the Constitution. 4. The Ld. AO failed to appreciate that penalty is an independent proceeding ... while levying the penalty the introduced the same. 6. The Ld. AO erred in the order, though there is no iota of evidence of incriminating material on the record to show that the income of the Appellant during the year under appeal was more than the income returned

ITO -24(2)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers vs. Kailash Chandra Gupta, HUF, Mumbai

ITA 4013/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. Vs. CIT 160 Taxman 233 for the proposition that cross examination opportunity need not be given when the certain incriminating material is found during the search and seizure operations. 11. From pages 19 to 25 of assessment order, the Ld. AO has given the names

Kaushik Chandravadan Parikh, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

ITA 2064/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 68

Investigation Directorate u/s. 132 in the premises of Shri S.C. Shah at Ahmedabad and during the operations, the Income Tax Department found certain incriminating material which shows that Mr. Shah was providing factitious entries to various persons based on which the beneficiaries claim false 2 Kaushik Chandravadan Parikh exemptions ... comments about detailed search and seizure operations by Investigation Wing of Kolkata, Ahemedabad and Mumbai, had to be taken into consideration where incriminating materials were found and seized relating to manipulation of 84 penny stocks, without financial fundamentals, were rigged and accommodation entries were provided to several assessees all over

Moushumi Mishra Gahlot, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

ITA 68/DEL/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Anushul, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 139Section 142(1)Section 153CSection 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 69C

without jurisdiction and mandatory requirements as has been held in DCIT vs U K Paints (Overseas) Ltd 2023-TIOL-58-SC-IT as no incriminating material for this assessment year was found in an income-tax search conducted on some other assessee. Thus, the entire proceedings were illegal and could

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 618/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 6.1 Giving an account of the case of AO on merits, it was submitted that the incriminating material in the case of the Appellant, which comprises of the seized material pertaining to A.Y 2014- 15 to 2016-17 and requisitioned material pertaining

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 617/DEL/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 6.1 Giving an account of the case of AO on merits, it was submitted that the incriminating material in the case of the Appellant, which comprises of the seized material pertaining to A.Y 2014- 15 to 2016-17 and requisitioned material pertaining

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 616/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 6.1 Giving an account of the case of AO on merits, it was submitted that the incriminating material in the case of the Appellant, which comprises of the seized material pertaining to A.Y 2014- 15 to 2016-17 and requisitioned material pertaining

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 615/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 6.1 Giving an account of the case of AO on merits, it was submitted that the incriminating material in the case of the Appellant, which comprises of the seized material pertaining to A.Y 2014- 15 to 2016-17 and requisitioned material pertaining

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 614/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 6.1 Giving an account of the case of AO on merits, it was submitted that the incriminating material in the case of the Appellant, which comprises of the seized material pertaining to A.Y 2014- 15 to 2016-17 and requisitioned material pertaining

Vishwanath Aggarwal, Delhi vs. The Addl. CIT, Central Range-05, Delhi

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the penalty is deleted

ITA 613/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.611 To 618/Del/2022 Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2012-13, 2011-12,2013-14, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Vishwanath Aggarwal, Vs Addl. Cit, House No.98, Block C-2, Range-05, Janakpuri, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 058. Pan: Abxpa4825B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : .07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Appeals Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’ For Short) In Appeals Filed Before Him Against The Penalty Orders Of The Ld. Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao, For Short). Further Details Of The Penalty Orders Of The Lower Authorities Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132ASection 153ASection 269SSection 271DSection 271E

ITAs No.611 to 618/Del/2022 6.1 Giving an account of the case of AO on merits, it was submitted that the incriminating material in the case of the Appellant, which comprises of the seized material pertaining to A.Y 2014- 15 to 2016-17 and requisitioned material pertaining