← 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

Gopal Krishna S Revankar, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 19(2) (Now Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 22(3)), Mumbai

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

ITA 1164/MUM/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1164/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Gopal Krishna S. Revankar बिधम/ Acit, Circle-19(2) (Now Lotus House, Off Andheri- Acit-22(3) Vs. Kurla Road, Sakinaka, Piramal Chambers, Andheri (E), Mumbai- Lalbaugh, Mumbai. 400072. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaapr4742C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mitesh Mehta Revenue By: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/01/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/04/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, Mumbai Dated 21.12.2017 For Assessment Year 2002-03. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: - “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Not Realizing The Fact That The Appellant Has Already Added Rs. 10,43,700/- To Its Total Income After Considering Rs.7,65,000/- From Meenakshi Bhavan & Other Receipts In The Rough Cash Book & Loose Papers Found During The Survey Action On The Assessee On 28.2.2002. 2. The Learned Cit (A) Erred In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,70,536/- On Account Of Unexplained Cash Found During The Survey. This Amounts To Taxing The Same Amount Twice. 3. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Making Addition Of Rs. 7,65,000/- On Account Of Unaccounted Receipts From Meenakshi Bhavan Resulting Into Taxing The Same Income Three Times.

For Appellant: Shri Mitesh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan (Sr. AR)
Section 133A

assessee is into various business (courier service and data entry service). A survey operation was conducted at his office premises on 28.02.2002 wherein incriminating material in the form of rough cash book, loose papers etc were found. Based on which, assessment ... dated 29.12.2018. Therefore, we conclude that the issues/addition made by the AO based on incriminating materials found during survey dated 28.02.2002 stands settled for those assessment years which are as under: - Sr. A.Y Addition u/s 68 of the Act No. 1 1996-97 LTCG Rs.2