← 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

Raju Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2092/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2016-17
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 23(4)(b)

04/02/2016 and 06/02/2016 u/s.131 and no questions were raised nor any answer was given relating to alleged loose papers. Apart from that, no incriminating material relating to assessee was found or seized during the search in case of her husband or daughters nor the loose papers belonged ... debit or credit, receipt or payment, income or expenditure. 13. On the other hand ld. DR in her counter submissions had stated as under:-  Incriminating material in the form of loose papers relating to assessee was found and seized during the search in the case of Moraj Group of entities

Raju Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2091/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2015-16
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 23(4)(b)

04/02/2016 and 06/02/2016 u/s.131 and no questions were raised nor any answer was given relating to alleged loose papers. Apart from that, no incriminating material relating to assessee was found or seized during the search in case of her husband or daughters nor the loose papers belonged ... debit or credit, receipt or payment, income or expenditure. 13. On the other hand ld. DR in her counter submissions had stated as under:-  Incriminating material in the form of loose papers relating to assessee was found and seized during the search in the case of Moraj Group of entities

Raju Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2090/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 23(4)(b)

04/02/2016 and 06/02/2016 u/s.131 and no questions were raised nor any answer was given relating to alleged loose papers. Apart from that, no incriminating material relating to assessee was found or seized during the search in case of her husband or daughters nor the loose papers belonged ... debit or credit, receipt or payment, income or expenditure. 13. On the other hand ld. DR in her counter submissions had stated as under:-  Incriminating material in the form of loose papers relating to assessee was found and seized during the search in the case of Moraj Group of entities

The ACIT, Kozhikode vs. Shri K.C.James, Goa

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals and the assessee’s COs are dismissed

ITA 54/COCH/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 2(45)

decision clarified that the jurisdiction to assess income u/s. 153A of the Act for an unabated assessment would only be on the basis of incriminating material found during search u/s.132 or requisition u/s.132A of the Act. That is, the jurisdiction to assess income under section 153A of the Act, notwithstanding ... 132A, the Assessing Officer assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the Assessing Officer would assume the jurisdiction to 3 ITANos. 53&54/Coch/2022 & CO Nos. 01 &02/Coch/2023

The ACIT, Kozhikode vs. Shri.. K.C.James, Goa

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals and the assessee’s COs are dismissed

ITA 53/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountantmemberand Shri Manomohan Das, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 132ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 2(45)

decision clarified that the jurisdiction to assess income u/s. 153A of the Act for an unabated assessment would only be on the basis of incriminating material found during search u/s.132 or requisition u/s.132A of the Act. That is, the jurisdiction to assess income under section 153A of the Act, notwithstanding ... 132A, the Assessing Officer assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed assessments, the Assessing Officer would assume the jurisdiction to 3 ITANos. 53&54/Coch/2022 & CO Nos. 01 &02/Coch/2023

Kishan Singh, Jaipur vs. ACIT Central Circle-4, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 83/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashish KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT) a
Section 127Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

disbelieve , even the factum of availability of opening cash. It is worth submitting that the assessment of search case is based upon incriminating material & there was no incriminating material with the department that opening cash was consumed elsewhere. Even there is no whisper in the AO 8 Kishan Singh ... part of AO to disregard the factum of preceding cash withdrawal forming source of redeposit of cash into bank account. Moreover, there was no incriminating material with the department that cash withdrawal on prior occasions was not available for making redeposit. [emphasis supplied] 5. That the ld AO failed

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bhupati Infrabuild Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 899/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Viraj Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu, D.R
Section 132ASection 153C

appreciating the fact that there is nothing in the language of the provisions which would indicate that the assessment is restricted to incriminating material or the basis of the assessment would be that which is discovered during the search or during the process contemplated by Section 132A of the Income ... been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of settled principle of law that addition made dehors the “incriminating material” made by the AO is not sustainable in view of the decision rendered by Special Bench of the Tribunal in case of CIT vs. Alcargo Global Logistic

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bhupati Infrabuild Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 898/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Viraj Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu, D.R
Section 132ASection 153C

appreciating the fact that there is nothing in the language of the provisions which would indicate that the assessment is restricted to incriminating material or the basis of the assessment would be that which is discovered during the search or during the process contemplated by Section 132A of the Income ... been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of settled principle of law that addition made dehors the “incriminating material” made by the AO is not sustainable in view of the decision rendered by Special Bench of the Tribunal in case of CIT vs. Alcargo Global Logistic

DCIT Central Circle-1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bhupati Infrabuild Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 897/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Viraj Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivasu, D.R
Section 132ASection 153C

appreciating the fact that there is nothing in the language of the provisions which would indicate that the assessment is restricted to incriminating material or the basis of the assessment would be that which is discovered during the search or during the process contemplated by Section 132A of the Income ... been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) on the basis of settled principle of law that addition made dehors the “incriminating material” made by the AO is not sustainable in view of the decision rendered by Special Bench of the Tribunal in case of CIT vs. Alcargo Global Logistic

Citron Infraprojects Limited, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-4, Mumbai

ITA 1518/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. K.C. Selvamani, CIT D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 153ASection 153DSection 263Section 56(2)(viib)

make addition in the assessment order passed u/s. 153A r.w.s. 144 of the Act which is not based on any incriminating material found in the search. 4. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1, the Hon'ble Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-4 erred in revising the approval ... consideration and adjudication of the issues at hand are : on the basis of search and seizure operation carried out at the premises of assessee “incriminating material” was seized on the basis of which notice under section 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) was issued. During

ACIT Central Circle-30, New Delhi vs. Kamana Industries Pvt Ltd, Sonipat

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4997/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2013-14 Acit, Vs Kamana Industries Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-30, Piau Maniyari, New Delhi. Narela Road, Kundli, Sonepat, Haryana – 131 028. Pan Aabck7580K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.C. Yadav & Shri Shivam Garg, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.07.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.4997/Del/2019 For Ay 2013-14 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi, In Appeal No.172/16- 17/2606 Dated 13.03.2019 [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, In Short] Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 153A Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 29.12.2016 By The Ld. Income-Tax Officer, Central Circle-30, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’). 2. The Only Issue To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld.Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Made On Account Of Share Capital Received By The Assessee In The Sum Of Rs.7,10,00,000/- In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Instant Case.

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav &For Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 153ASection 68

could be subject matter of any addition in the search assessment framed u/s 153A of the Act in the absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search qua this issue of share capital. The law is very well settled by the recent decision ... disturb the assessment already completed either u/s 143(1) or u/s 143(3) or u/s 147 of the Act unless he has any incriminating material found during the course of search relatable to such assessment year (i.e., unabated assessment year) qua the related addition that is made. In the instant

Al- Dua Food Processing Pvt. Ltd., Aligarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 8258/DEL/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2016-17
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154ASection 155ASection 234CSection 80I

framing assessment u/s 155A read with Sec 143(3) of the IT Act 1561 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), can travel beyond the incriminating material found during search operation (2) Because the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs 92,54,914 ignoring the principal ... that assessment consequent to search operation are confined to incriminating material found during the course of search. (3) Because the Ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.92,94,914/- on account of alleged excess deduction claimed by the appellant us 80B of the Act. (4) Because

Al- Dua Food Processing Pvt. Ltd., Aligarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 8257/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154ASection 155ASection 234CSection 80I

framing assessment u/s 155A read with Sec 143(3) of the IT Act 1561 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), can travel beyond the incriminating material found during search operation (2) Because the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs 92,54,914 ignoring the principal ... that assessment consequent to search operation are confined to incriminating material found during the course of search. (3) Because the Ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.92,94,914/- on account of alleged excess deduction claimed by the appellant us 80B of the Act. (4) Because

Al- Dua Food Processing Pvt. Ltd., Aligarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 8256/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154ASection 155ASection 234CSection 80I

framing assessment u/s 155A read with Sec 143(3) of the IT Act 1561 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), can travel beyond the incriminating material found during search operation (2) Because the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs 92,54,914 ignoring the principal ... that assessment consequent to search operation are confined to incriminating material found during the course of search. (3) Because the Ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.92,94,914/- on account of alleged excess deduction claimed by the appellant us 80B of the Act. (4) Because

Al- Dua Food Processing Pvt. Ltd., Aligarh vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals in ITA No

ITA 8255/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2023AY 2013-14
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 154ASection 155ASection 234CSection 80I

framing assessment u/s 155A read with Sec 143(3) of the IT Act 1561 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), can travel beyond the incriminating material found during search operation (2) Because the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs 92,54,914 ignoring the principal ... that assessment consequent to search operation are confined to incriminating material found during the course of search. (3) Because the Ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.92,94,914/- on account of alleged excess deduction claimed by the appellant us 80B of the Act. (4) Because

DCIT Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Bishan Jugraj Jain, Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 271/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. D.R
Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

declared the assessment order passed under section 147 of the Act void ab- initio on the ground that there was no "incriminating material" found/seized in the search matter. Moreover assessment concerning search matters can be reopened only under section 153 of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) decided the present appeal ... reopen the assessment proceedings for 10 years subject to the conditions specified in the said section. But in the instant case neither any "incriminating material" is there on record nor the reopening proceedings have been initiated under section 153A of the Act. So in these circumstances

Shri Manmohan Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, ground no. 4 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.171/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19

Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)Section 250

additions made in the impugned order are beyond jurisdiction and illegal also for the reason that these could not have been made since no incriminating material has been found as a result of search warranting impugned addition. 4. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case ... prejudice to each other.” 3. Brief fact of the case is that the search was conducted u/s 132 at the assessee’s premises. The incriminating material was seized by the revenue. The revenue found that the assessee has financial transaction with M/s Saffron Home Developers Private Ltd (in short SHDPL

Shri Ravinder Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 9/ASR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

Officer is below the rank of Joint C.I.T. For the purpose of approval, the Approving Authority is required to see all search material including incriminating material, seized documents, appraisal reports, enquiries made by the investigation wing and various enquiries made by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings

Shri Ravinder Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

Officer is below the rank of Joint C.I.T. For the purpose of approval, the Approving Authority is required to see all search material including incriminating material, seized documents, appraisal reports, enquiries made by the investigation wing and various enquiries made by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings

Shri Ravinder Singh, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 7/ASR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Hitendra Bhauraoji Ninawe, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153D

Officer is below the rank of Joint C.I.T. For the purpose of approval, the Approving Authority is required to see all search material including incriminating material, seized documents, appraisal reports, enquiries made by the investigation wing and various enquiries made by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings