← 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Sri Muthukumaran Educational Trust, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1263/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1263/Chny/2025 & C.O.No.64/Chny/2025 (In Ita No.: 1263/Chny/2025) िनधा#रण वष# / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Sri Muthukumaran Educational Trust, Central Circle -2 (1), Vs. 641/61, Ramasamy Salai, Chennai. K. K. Nagar, Chennai – 600 078. [Pan: Aabts-6980-L] (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'थ%/Respondent/ Cross Objector ) Assessee By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. Department By : Mr. Bipin C.N., C.I.T. & Ms. R. Anita, Addl. C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.AFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N., C.I.T. &
Section 115BSection 143(3)

conclusion that these transactions in the nature of cash deposits as anonymous donation(s). At the outset the cash book cannot constitute a incriminating material. The appellant has duly recorded the transactions as receipt in their books of accounts. As evident in the assessment order, the AO has not made ... addition has been made on a generalized presumption that such cash deposits represent unidentified donations, without bringing on record any cogent or incriminating material to substantiate the said inference. 15. At the outset, we observe that the assessee had placed before the Ld.CIT(A) institution-wise cash books along with

DCIT, Central Cir-2(4), Chennai vs. D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 94/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

DCIT, Central Cir-2(4), Chennai vs. D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 93/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

DCIT, Central Cir-2(4), Chennai vs. D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 92/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

DCIT, Central Cir-2(4), Chennai vs. D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 91/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai vs. B Devahie, Chennai

In the result the ITA No

ITA 67/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act. 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... ld.CIT(A) sought for remand report from the AO. The assessee also raised emphatically a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the plea on the ground that the presence of seized material was not a pre-requisite

D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3344/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3343/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

D R Balakrishna Raja, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3342/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:3342 To 3344/Chny/2018 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2013-14 Shri. D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Acit, 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Vs. Central Circle -3(3), T.Nagar, Chennai. Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (()यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:91 To 94/Chny/2019 "नधा%रण वष% / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2014-15 Dcit, Shri D. R. Balakrishna Raja, Central Circle -2(4), Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, Chennai. T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. [Pan:Agwpd-2354-E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. K.G.Raghunath, Advocate Department By : Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, Cit. सुनवाई क5 तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 घोषणा क5 तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 153ASection 56Section 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act. 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... evidence which were sent to Assessing Officer seeking for remand report. The assessee also raised a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made in the hands of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the assessee’s plea, on the ground that

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result the ITA No

ITA 3331/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act. 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... ld.CIT(A) sought for remand report from the AO. The assessee also raised emphatically a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the plea on the ground that the presence of seized material was not a pre-requisite

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result the ITA No

ITA 3330/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act. 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... ld.CIT(A) sought for remand report from the AO. The assessee also raised emphatically a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the plea on the ground that the presence of seized material was not a pre-requisite

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

In the result the ITA No

ITA 3329/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. K.G.Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153ASection 68

assuming jurisdiction under section 153A of the Act. 2.2 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that in the absence of incriminating material found during search, the Assessing Officer cannot frame an assessment under section 153A of the Act 2.3 The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought ... ld.CIT(A) sought for remand report from the AO. The assessee also raised emphatically a legal ground that in the absence of any incriminating material, no addition could be made. However, Ld.CIT(A) rejected the plea on the ground that the presence of seized material was not a pre-requisite

Bharat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5832/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 69

case of Hiranandani Group and related persons. Though, in the assessment order the Assessing Officer has not discussed in detail the nature of incriminating material / evidence available on record to indicate payment of on–money in cash by the assessee to M/s. Crescendo Associates, however, from the show cause notice ... dated 4th March 2015, which is reproduced by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, it appears that the incriminating materials are in the form of pen drive found and seized from the residence of one of the employees of Hiranandani Group and a statement recorded under section

Bharat Harishchandra Purohit, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 5831/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia

Section 153CSection 254(1)Section 69

case of Hiranandani Group and related persons. Though, in the assessment order the Assessing Officer has not discussed in detail the nature of incriminating material / evidence available on record to indicate payment of on–money in cash by the assessee to M/s. Crescendo Associates, however, from the show cause notice ... dated 4th March 2015, which is reproduced by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, it appears that the incriminating materials are in the form of pen drive found and seized from the residence of one of the employees of Hiranandani Group and a statement recorded under section

Maharashtra Corporation Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4146/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69C

follow therefrom. 24. In Kanak Impex, the Hon’ble High Court upheld full disallowance under section 69C on the basis of specific and corroborative incriminating material, including: i. investigation by the Sales Tax Department establishing VAT fraud, i. findings that the assessee was actively involved in obtaining bogus bills ... foundation for invoking section 69C to its full rigour. 25. In the present case, however, the Revenue has not brought on record any comparable incriminating material. There is no investigation report of the Sales Tax Department, no finding of VAT violation, no identification of the assessee as a beneficiary

Zento Exim Private Limited, Ram Nagar Extension vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5131/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member [Assessment Year: 2023-24] Zento Exim Private Limited, Acit, 1/4331, T/F, Kh No.587 Ram Vikas Bhawan, Ito, Nagar Extension, Vs New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110032 Pan-Aljpk8665M Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Gaurav Jain, Adv. Shri Tarun Chanana, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Amish S Gupt, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.01.2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148BSection 69A

holding that the statement of Mr. Manoj Kandpal recorded under section 132(4) of the Act during the search investigation constitutes incriminating material. 3. Brief facts of the case during the year under consideration, the assessee filed his Return of Income for A.Y. 2023-24 on 28.10.2023, declaring total income

Dr. Virendra Swaroop Educational Foundation, Kanpur vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Dehradun

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 211/DDN/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun16 Jan 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Through Virtual Mode] [Assessment Year : 2023-24] Dr. Virendra Swaroop Vs Acit Educational Foundation Central Circle 15/96, Civil Lines, Kanpur Dehradun Uttar Pradesh-208001 Pan-Aaajd0224D Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Salil Kapoor, Adv. Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Shri Sumit Lal Chandanim, Adv. Shri Shivam Yadav, Adv. & Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Poonam Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.09.2025 By Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur [“Pcit”] Passed U/S 12(Ab)(4)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961[“The Act”] Cancelling The Registration Granted U/S 12A Of The Act From Assessment Year 2023-24 & Onwards.

Section 11Section 12Section 127Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 132Section 143(3)

case of Mehta Group and connected associates, Dehradun engaged in the business of real estate and leasing business activities, wherein several incriminating materials were found and seized. It is observed that some of these papers related to assessee. The assessee trust is based in Kanpur and Dehradun, oversees the operations ... That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the cancellation of registration on the basis of alleged incriminating material found during search on some other person is wrong, illegal and bad in law. The finding of misutilization/diversion of funds is unjustified, totally incorrect

DCIT, Dehradun vs. M/S Kanatal Resorts & Spa P.Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 5579/DEL/2015[2009-2010]Status: HeardITAT Dehradun16 Jan 2026AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalma No. 3/Ddn/2022 : Asstt. Year: 2009-10 &

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Yadav, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 254(2)

very terms. 3 MA No. 2/DDN/2022 Kantal Resorts & Spa Pvt. Ltd. 5. We afforded due opportunity to the department to refer to any incriminating material against the assessee found/seized during the course of search wherein no such records could be produced. That being the case, we conclude that the impugned ... assessment itself framed on 24.03.2014 u/s 153A of the Act is not sustainable in law for want of any incriminating material found/seized during the departmental search action. The same stand quashed in very terms therefore. 6. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. 7. To sum up, this Revenue

Sunil Piyush Shah, Ahmedabad vs. NFAC, Delhi Present Juris. -the ITO, Ward-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1917/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Piyush Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 144BSection 147Section 148ASection 244ASection 250Section 270ASection 270A(9)Section 29A

appellate order dated 05.09.2025 passed under section 250 are vitiated in law, having been framed and upheld without furnishing the Appellant with any incriminating material specific to him, and without I.T.A No. 1917/Ahd/2025 Sunil Piyush Shah, A.Y. 2019-20 granting an opportunity to cross-examine the persons whose statements were ... issued under section 148A(b) and the consequential order under section 148A(d) dated 02.05.2023 were passed mechanically, without furnishing the Appellant with any incriminating material specific to him, and without granting an opportunity to cross-examine the persons whose statements were relied upon, thereby violating the principles of natural

ITO Ward -2(1), Koolkata vs. Unicorn Land Developers Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, CO and the appeal of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 688/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 1Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the basis of seized documents with ID Mark UPPL/3, being incriminating material. The assessee has filed cross objection supporting the order of Id. CIT(A). The facts in brief are that a search action u/s 132 of the Income ... holding that this being an unabated assessment on the date of search and there being no incriminating material seized during the course of search, therefore, the Id. AO has no jurisdiction to make the addition. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was allowed. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing