← 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

Thomas Chandy Kondody, Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 531/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.530/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.531/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Thomas Chandy Kondody Acit बनाम C/O. B. Anand & Associates (Cas) Central Circle-1(2), No.5/4, Rama Street, Chennai. / Vs. Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aljpk-1289-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath (Fca)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)- Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 30-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2024

For Appellant: Shri Anandd Babunath (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)- Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

claim of disbursal to the small shareholders was covered by the judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, which mandates presence incriminating materials to make an addition in the hands of the appellant.” As is evident, the sole issue that arises for our consideration is additions arising ... stands dismissed. 7. In ground No.6, Ld. AR has raised a legal ground that the assessment was not based on any incriminating material that was ever found during the course of search. This argument is to be summarily rejected since the only basis to make the assessment in the case

Thomas Chandy Kondody, Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle-1(2), Chennai

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 530/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.530/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.531/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Shri Thomas Chandy Kondody Acit बनाम C/O. B. Anand & Associates (Cas) Central Circle-1(2), No.5/4, Rama Street, Chennai. / Vs. Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aljpk-1289-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anandd Babunath (Fca)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)- Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 30-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 01-02-2024

For Appellant: Shri Anandd Babunath (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)- Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

claim of disbursal to the small shareholders was covered by the judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Kabul Chawla, which mandates presence incriminating materials to make an addition in the hands of the appellant.” As is evident, the sole issue that arises for our consideration is additions arising ... stands dismissed. 7. In ground No.6, Ld. AR has raised a legal ground that the assessment was not based on any incriminating material that was ever found during the course of search. This argument is to be summarily rejected since the only basis to make the assessment in the case

Syed Zeeshanuddin, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 355/HYD/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.355/Hyd/2022 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Syed Zeeshanuddin Vs. Asstt. C. I. T. Hyderabad Central Circle 2(2) Pan:Bqgps0128A Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri K. Madhusudan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 31/01/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14/06/2022 Of The Learned Cit (A)-12, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2015-16. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit (A) In Confirming The Validity Of Assessment U/S 153A In Absence Of Any Incriminating Material & Thereby Confirming The Addition Of Rs.12,02,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer As Unexplained Expenditure By Applying The Provisions Of Section 115Bbe Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: : Shri K. Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

however, these all relate to the order of the learned CIT (A) in confirming the validity of assessment u/s 153A in absence of any incriminating material and thereby confirming the addition of Rs.12,02,000/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained expenditure by applying the provisions of section 115BBE ... assessee apart from challenging the addition on merit challenged the validity of the order passed u/s 153A in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. However, the learned CIT (A) was not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee and dismissed the appeal both legally