← 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-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1910/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT -DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

hereby disallowed.” 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who found that the AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during search conducted on its premises on 08.02.2021 to make disallowance of the deduction u/s 1OAA of the Act. He also found that ... linked /correlated with the impugned additions made. As such, the A.O. lacks jurisdiction to make additions/disallowances which are not based on relevant incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings5.34 Conclusion- As stated above, the AO has not brought on record through the assessment order or through any communication

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1909/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No. 1905 To 1910/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 To 2021-22) बिधम / Dcit, Central Circle – 2(2) M/S Esskay Niryat Corp Old Cgo Bldg, 806, 8Th Pvt Ltd., Vs. Floor, Mk Road, Mumbai – Unit No. 101, 201 & 106, 400020. 206 Yamuna Sdf Complex, Phase Ii, Kasez Ghandhidham, Kutch, Gujrat – 370230 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No. : Aaffe2263G (अपीलार्थी (प्रत्यर्थी / Appellant) .. / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal A/W Shri Gagan Khandelwal Revenue By: Shri Biswanath Das, Cit –Dr & Shri P.D. Chougule सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/03/2024

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT –DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

hereby disallowed.” 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who found that the AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during search conducted on its premises on 08.02.2021 to make disallowance of the deduction u/s 10AA of the Act. He also found that ... linked /correlated with the impugned additions made. As such, the A.O. lacks jurisdiction to make additions/disallowances which are not based on relevant incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings5.34 Conclusion- As stated above, the AO has not brought on record through the assessment order or through any communication

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1908/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT -DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

hereby disallowed.” 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who found that the AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during search conducted on its premises on 08.02.2021 to make disallowance of the deduction u/s 1OAA of the Act. He also found that ... linked /correlated with the impugned additions made. As such, the A.O. lacks jurisdiction to make additions/disallowances which are not based on relevant incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings5.34 Conclusion- As stated above, the AO has not brought on record through the assessment order or through any communication

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1907/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT -DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

hereby disallowed.” 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who found that the AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during search conducted on its premises on 08.02.2021 to make disallowance of the deduction u/s 1OAA of the Act. He also found that ... linked /correlated with the impugned additions made. As such, the A.O. lacks jurisdiction to make additions/disallowances which are not based on relevant incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings5.34 Conclusion- As stated above, the AO has not brought on record through the assessment order or through any communication

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

ITA 1906/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT –DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

hereby disallowed. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who found that the AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during search conducted on its premises on 08.02.2021 to make disallowance of the deduction u/s 10AA of the Act. He also found that ... linked /correlated with the impugned additions made. As such, the A.O. lacks jurisdiction to make additions/disallowances which are not based on relevant incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings5.34 Conclusion- As stated above, the AO has not brought on record through the assessment order or through any communication

DCIT, CC-2(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Esskay Niryat Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1905/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2024AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal a/w Shri GaganFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT –DR &
Section 10ASection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

hereby disallowed." 5. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who found that the AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during search conducted on its premises on 08.02.2021 to make disallowance of the deduction u/s 10AA of the Act. He also found that ... linked /correlated with the impugned additions made. As such, the A.O. lacks jurisdiction to make additions/disallowances which are not based on relevant incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings5.34 Conclusion- As stated above, the AO has not brought on record through the assessment order or through any communication

ACIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Stonex India Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1784/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

sales out of the books corresponding to each and every sale. Since section 153A of the Act gets invoked only with respect to the incriminating material found during the course of the search, clearly extrapolation without any incriminating material would be contrary to the spirit of the section. There ... scope for extrapolation in assessment framed under section 153A of the Act and the additions can be made only with reference to incriminating material found during the course of search. This view supported by another judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT versus

M/S Tjr Properties Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. ACIT, CC-2, Chandigarh

ITA 5/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Kusum, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(b)Section 153DSection 68

153A of the Act is without jurisdiction. 5. That the additions made in the assessment Order are not based on any corroborative and relevant incriminating material stated to have been unearthed during the course of any search by the Assessing Officer, though no search has taken place on the appellant ... merit and, accordingly, Ground Nos. 3 and 4 are rejected. 14. According to Ground No.5, the additions made are not based on any incriminating material found during the search. In this regard, the ld. CIT(A) has held that the ITA 5 &145/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 11 Assessing Officer

Mr Vicky Murli Advani, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Int. Tax) Ward 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3664/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhmr. Vicky Murli Advani Vs. Income Tax Officer, T3-3202, Runval Greens, International Tax, Rosewood, Near Fortis Ward1(1)(1), Hospital, Mulund Room No. 1817A, 18Th Goregaon Link Road, Floor, Air India Bldg. Mulund West- 400 078 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Agypa7741A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Rajesh Sanghvi Respondent By : S. Arunkumar Date Of Hearing 27.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 04.03.2024

For Appellant: Rajesh SanghviFor Respondent: S. Arunkumar
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

ground of on money payment purely on the basis of statement given by the director of Runwal Group without bringing on record any incriminating material showing that assessee has actually paid the said on money on the purchase of the flat. The ld. Counsel also referred copy of assessment order ... taken on money on the purchase of the flat. He also referred various pages of the paper book and submitted that there was no incriminating material found against assessee of giving on money to the builder. The ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the various decision of ITAT

Bharat Laxman Bhiwapurkar, Thane vs. ITO, Ward 1(5), Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is partly allowed

ITA 3413/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Amarjit Singhbharat Laxman Vs. Ito, Ward 1(5), Bhiwapurkar, 204, Room No. 14, B Wing, Oxford, Regency Heights, 6Th Floor, Ashar It Park, Azad Nagar, Kolshet, Road No. 16Z, Wagle, Thane - 400602 Ind. Estate, Thane-400604 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Abnpb8487A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Subodh Ratnaparkhi Respondent By : S. Arunkumar Date Of Hearing 26.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 04.03.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 03.08.2023 For A.Y. 2011-12. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. The Hon. Cit (A) Erred In Upholding Re-Opening Of Assessment U/S 147 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, Inspite Of The Fact That There Was No Incriminating Material Pertaining To The Appellant With Regards To Alleged On-Money Paid For Purchase Of Flat From Cosmos Group & Therefore The Re-Opening Was In Absence Of Any Independent & Valid Belief On The Part Of The Id Ao That Any Income Chargeable To Tax Had Escaped Assessment. The Re-Opening Of Assessment U/S 147 Being Bad-In-Law, The Asst. Order Flowing Therefrom, Being The Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 Is Also Invalid & Bad In Law & Hence The Same May Be Quashed 2. The Hon Cit (A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 31,00,000/-, U/S 69 Of The 1.1 Act, 1961, As Unexplained Investment Towards Alleged On- Money Paid Towards Purchase Of Flat No. A-07, 7Th Floor, Twilight, Cosmos Horizon, Ghodbunder Road, Thane (W) To Cosmos Group, Ignoring The Contentions Of The Appellant That There Was No Incriminating

For Appellant: Subodh RatnaparkhiFor Respondent: S. Arunkumar
Section 131Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69

erred in upholding re-opening of assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, inspite of the fact that there was no incriminating material pertaining to the appellant with regards to alleged on-money paid for purchase of flat from Cosmos Group and therefore the re-opening ... please be deleted. 3. The Hon. CIT (A) erred in relying upon the statements of the members of the Cosmos Group and alleged incriminating material, without granting the appellant any real and reasonable opportunity to cross examine the said persons or copy of such incriminating material, thereby breaching the salient

Suresh Productions, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 641/HYD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 641/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Suresh Productions, Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad Income Tax, Vs. [Pan No. Aajfs7306J] Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri A. Srinivas, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/02/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement On: 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, J.M: Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad, (“Learned Cit(A)”), In The Case Of Suresh Productions (“The Assessee”) For The Assessment Year 2015-16, Assessee Preferred This Appeal With A Delay Of One Day. Learned Ar Explained That The Delay Is Due To Calculation Error. Heard Learned Dr. Delay Is Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri A. Srinivas, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waseem UR Rehman, DR
Section 153CSection 271Section 271(1)(c)

contra, learned DR placed reliance on the explanation 5A to section 271 of the Act and submitted that certain incriminating material pertaining to assessee was found and seized during the search on 20/11/2019 and it is only pursuant to the same, the assessee admitted the additional income and, therefore

Blue Park Sea Foods Private Limited., Bhimavaram vs. Dy CIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 515/VIZ/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.515/Viz/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Blue Park Sea Foods Private Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, Bhimavaram, W.G. Dist, Central Circle, Andhra Pradesh. Vijayawada. Pan: Aaccb 0689 H (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri C. Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40Section 68

erred in law in stating that the submission of the appellant before him that the impugned addition was not based on any incriminating material and thus becomes unsustainable as per section 153A was made for the first time before him and hence liable for rejection as being an afterthought

DCIT CC 7(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Nitesh Shahra, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 474/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit – Central Circle – 7(2) V. Shri Nitesh Shahra Room No. 655, Aayakar Bhavan Flat No. 102, 1St Floor 10 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Sharda Building, A-Road Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Abjps2642E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Dr. P. Daniel Department Represented By : Shri S. Srinivasu

Section 127(2)Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 260

dated 09.03.2015 ignoring the fact that the scope of assessment proceedings under section 153A of the Act is not limited to the incriminating material found during the search. 3. With regard to Ground No. 1 the relevant facts brought on record by both the parties are a search and seizure ... observe that Assessing Officer has not made any fresh addition relating to sale of shares of Ruchi Soya Industries Limited. Since there is no incriminating material brought on record and the original assessment passed under section 143(3) is not abated and at the time of revised assessment proceedings under

Sarika Sachdeva, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-01, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 68/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

returned income during the course of assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act, which are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search on the appellant, and contrary to the ratio of various judicial precedents which have held that the scope ... assessment which are not pending at the time of conducting of search u/s 153A of the Act, encompasses additions/ disallowance, based on incriminating material found during the course of search only. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in the facts and in law in upholding the Rs.59

Sarika Sachdeva, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-01, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 67/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

returned income during the course of assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act, which are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search on the appellant, and contrary to the ratio of various judicial precedents which have held that the scope ... assessment which are not pending at the time of conducting of search u/s 153A of the Act, encompasses additions/ disallowance, based on incriminating material found during the course of search only. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in the facts and in law in upholding the Rs.59

Sarika Sachdeva, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-01, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 66/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: or during the course of hearing of the appeal.

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69A

returned income during the course of assessment u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act, which are not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search on the appellant, and contrary to the ratio of various judicial precedents which have held that the scope ... assessment which are not pending at the time of conducting of search u/s 153A of the Act, encompasses additions/ disallowance, based on incriminating material found during the course of search only. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in the facts and in law in upholding the Rs.59

Natasha Kohli, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-8, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1792/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharatr Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17(2)(iv)Section 69

action of the AO, despite the fact that the additions made by the AO are unsustainable in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 7. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ... case of Bishwanath Garodia (supra) held that no additions can be made in respect of unabated assessment which have become final, if no incriminating material is found during the course of search. The facts are similar in the present case and it is fact on record that the addition made

Addl.CIT, Special Range-18, New Delhi vs. Jagananth Hemchand Jain, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7755/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 69C

ought have been invoked in the circumstances of the case which specifically provides for assessment of third person (assessee herein) based on incriminating material discovered in relation to third person search proceedings in another case. It is the case of the assessee that where specific jurisdiction is provided under section

Addl.CIT, Special Range-18, New Delhi vs. Jagananth Hemchand Jain, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7754/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Feb 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 69C

ought have been invoked in the circumstances of the case which specifically provides for assessment of third person (assessee herein) based on incriminating material discovered in relation to third person search proceedings in another case. It is the case of the assessee that where specific jurisdiction is provided under section

Lakshmaiah Gunuputi, Bhimavaram vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Rajahmundary

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 55/VIZ/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 40A(3)Section 69

2/11/2017 in the case of the assessee at his residential premises. A search warrant was executed in the name of the assessee and various incriminating material was found and seized. Subsequently, an order U/s. 127 of the Act for centralization of the case was passed by the Principal Commissioner