← 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

M/S Century 21 Malls P. Ltd., Indore vs. The ACIT 2(1), Indore

In the result, all appeals of the Revenue are dismissed, while all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 949/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri S. S. Deshpande, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 153ASection 68

accounts of the assessee were un-reliable, accordingly he rejected the books of the assessee and made the impugned addition, though there was no incriminating material with the AO to make such a finding and make the impugned addition. The ld.counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee ... proper and unjustified. Further, the ld.CIT(A) has himself noted, while deleting various addition in the case of the assessee, that no incriminating material was found by the Revenue so as to make the impugned additions. Besides pointing out various anomalies by the ld.counsel for the assessee in the method

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2755/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151

additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. That in absence of any failure on part ... additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. hat in absence of any failure on part

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, New Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2754/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151

additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. That in absence of any failure on part ... additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. hat in absence of any failure on part

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2753/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151

additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. That in absence of any failure on part ... additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. hat in absence of any failure on part

Vikas Gupta, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-32, Delhi

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2752/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151

additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. That in absence of any failure on part ... additions made thereafter by the Ld. AO are wrong and void ab initio where there was no discovery of suppressed transaction or any incriminating material during the course of survey proceeding and Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the same. 7. hat in absence of any failure on part

Rakesh Kumar Bansal, Gujrat vs. DCIT, Central Cercle, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 2516/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2515/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Geeta Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Aispb9075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2516/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Rakesh Kumar Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Abwpb1370M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 292CSection 69

searched person. He has not made any enquiry nor he has linked the documents or made any efforts to show that the incriminating material (ledger account and entries therein) said to have been seized are belong to the assessee. The tally data said to have been recovered in the premises ... clear from the assessment order that any sort of the enquiries made at all by the Assessing Officer in placing reliance on the incriminating material said to have been seized from the premises of V.K. Patel. Nothing was recorded by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order the statement

Geeta Bansal, Gujrat vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ghaziabad

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are partly allowed

ITA 2515/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2515/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Geeta Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Aispb9075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2516/Del/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Rakesh Kumar Bansal Dcit Ch. No. 206-207, Vs. Central Circle Ansal Satyam Rdc, Ghaziabad. Rajnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 201002 Pan No. Abwpb1370M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 292CSection 69

searched person. He has not made any enquiry nor he has linked the documents or made any efforts to show that the incriminating material (ledger account and entries therein) said to have been seized are belong to the assessee. The tally data said to have been recovered in the premises ... clear from the assessment order that any sort of the enquiries made at all by the Assessing Officer in placing reliance on the incriminating material said to have been seized from the premises of V.K. Patel. Nothing was recorded by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order the statement

Atul Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

ITA 206/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 69A

dated 08.05.2015 which is a lead case tagged with more than 115 cases on the issue of restriction of additions only to incriminating material found during search. 4. That the order of Ld CIT (A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That ... transaction of purchase of shares. As per the assessee, the AO has simply relied upon the documents seized in which there was no incriminating material whatsoever. Assessee has also reiterated that seized material was obtained from the premises of Rajiv Gupta and assessment is outside the scope of section 153A

Atul Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

ITA 205/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 69A

dated 08.05.2015 which is a lead case tagged with more than 115 cases on the issue of restriction of additions only to incriminating material found during search. 4. That the order of Ld CIT (A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That ... transaction of purchase of shares. As per the assessee, the AO has simply relied upon the documents seized in which there was no incriminating material whatsoever. Assessee has also reiterated that seized material was obtained from the premises of Rajiv Gupta and assessment is outside the scope of section 153A

Atul Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

ITA 1395/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 69A

dated 08.05.2015 which is a lead case tagged with more than 115 cases on the issue of restriction of additions only to incriminating material found during search. 4. That the order of Ld CIT (A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That ... transaction of purchase of shares. As per the assessee, the AO has simply relied upon the documents seized in which there was no incriminating material whatsoever. Assessee has also reiterated that seized material was obtained from the premises of Rajiv Gupta and assessment is outside the scope of section 153A

DCIT Central Circle -28, New Delhi vs. Atul Kumar Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

ITA 1931/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 69A

dated 08.05.2015 which is a lead case tagged with more than 115 cases on the issue of restriction of additions only to incriminating material found during search. 4. That the order of Ld CIT (A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That ... transaction of purchase of shares. As per the assessee, the AO has simply relied upon the documents seized in which there was no incriminating material whatsoever. Assessee has also reiterated that seized material was obtained from the premises of Rajiv Gupta and assessment is outside the scope of section 153A

ACIT Central Circle-28, New Delhi vs. Rajiv Gupta, New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeals for AYs 2011-12 in the cases of

ITA 1164/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 132Section 69A

dated 08.05.2015 which is a lead case tagged with more than 115 cases on the issue of restriction of additions only to incriminating material found during search. 4. That the order of Ld CIT (A) is perverse, erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law. 5. That ... transaction of purchase of shares. As per the assessee, the AO has simply relied upon the documents seized in which there was no incriminating material whatsoever. Assessee has also reiterated that seized material was obtained from the premises of Rajiv Gupta and assessment is outside the scope of section 153A

Peerless Consultancy Services Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-16, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 9750/DEL/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 69C

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer for disturbing the item of regular assessment without any incriminating material found and seized during the search and post search inquiry, hence the impugned assessment order is ab initio void, bad in law and without

Peerless Consultancy Services P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 9748/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 69C

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in confirming the action of Ld. Assessing Officer for disturbing the item of regular assessment without any incriminating material found and seized during the search and post search inquiry, hence the impugned assessment order is ab initio void, bad in law and without

Tikeswar Bag, Bolangir vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 108/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) सं/It(Ss)A Nos.25 To 30/Ctk/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण) सं/It(Ss)A No.108/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2011-2012 To 2016-2017 & 2017-2018) Tikeswar Bag, Vs Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur At-Tengra, Badasaimara, Bolangir-767037 Pan No. :Darpb 1978 Q (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Arun Kanti Sinha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15/02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, All Dated 30.03.2022 For The Assessment Years 2011-2012 To 2016-2017 & 2017-2018, Respectively. 2. None Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. However, An Adjournment Application Has Been Filed By Shri Jag Mohan Pattnaik, Advocate Claiming That He Is Suffering From Severe Cold & Fever & Consequently The Adjournment Is Being Sought. The Counsel Has Also Attached A Medical Certificate Which Mentions That He Is Having Fever Of High Grade. The Medical Certificate Is Issued From A Doctor With Apollo Heart Institute. It Does Not Even Contain The Patient Id Of The Said Hospital. Thus, The Ground Taken For Adjournment, In Our Opinion, Is Not A Plausible One And, Therefore, The Same Is Not Accepted.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Sinha, CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 153A

present appeals of the assessee and we do so. 5. In regard to the legal issues raised by the assessee that there is no incriminating material found in the course of search, it must be mentioned here that only when the assessee has filed his return and the assessment ... been completed can the same be reopened u/s.153A of the Act in the presence of incriminating material. In the present case, clearly the assessee has never filed its return before, has also not even obtained PAN Number and, therefore, there is no question of an assessment having been done

Sh. Rajiv Jain, Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5178/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.5178/Del/2015 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2007-08 बनाम Rajiv Jain Dcit Vs. C/O Rajiv Saxena & Co. Central Circle-1, (Advocates & Slicitors), New Delhi. H.No. 318-D, Mayur Vihar, Phase-Ii, Delhi. Pan No. Aajpj0074G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 69

Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in failing to appreciate that during the course of search, admittedly no incriminating material was found as a result of search conducted under section 132(1) of the Act, as such, learned Deputy Commissioner of Income ... without jurisdiction. b. That while upholding the order of assessment, learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that since no incriminating material was found as a result of search, as such, addition made is outside the scope of section 153 A of the Act. 3. That

DCIT, Central-2, Indore vs. Shri Krihna Kumar Verma, Indore

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 185/IND/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 139Section 153ASection 69ASection 69B

Krishna Kumar Verma by the assessee as part of unaccounted business and source thereof stated during the course of search itself and no other incriminating material was found during the search proceedings and,thus, the same cannot be treated as income from undisclosed source of income

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Tirupati Buildings & Officers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2405/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 The Acit, Central M/S. Tirupati Buildings & Circle-18, Jhandewalan, Offices Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 110055 Vs. Plot No. 3, Dwarka City Centre Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi 110017 Pan Aacct7060J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Amaresh Singh, Cit Dr For Assessee : Shri Mahavir Singh, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amaresh Singh, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 250Section 4Section 68

facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 74,83,17,490/- without appreciating the fact that the addition was based on incriminating material in the form of two balance sheets marked as real and final found during the course of search action. 5. That the commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals ... that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law on facts in deleting the addition without appreciating facts that the addition was based on incriminating material in the form of two balance sheets marked as real and final which was found during the course of search action

DCIT Central Circle-8, New Delhi vs. Vatika Ltd, Gurgaon

ITA 1517/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153A

actually Rs.104.50 crore 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that addition which was not based on incriminating material found during the search could not be made in assessment u/s 153A of the I.T. Act and, consequently, deleting addition of Rs.104 crore, without

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur vs. Bolisetty Kameswara Rao, Guntur

Appeals are dismissed and the two Cross Objections of the assessee are disposed off accordingly

ITA 186/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 185 & 186/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-15 & 2015-16) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Bolisetty Kameswara Rao, Income Tax, Central Circle-1, D.No.3-29-40/4, 2Nd Lane, 3Rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Krishna Nagar, Lakshmipuram Main Road, Guntur-522006. Guntur-522 007. Pan: Achpb 2189 A (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 18 & 19/Viz/2022 आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 185 & 186/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-15 & 2015-16) The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Bolisetty Kameswara Rao, Income Tax, Central Circle-1, D.No.3-29-40/4, 2Nd Lane, 3Rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Krishna Nagar, Lakshmipuram Main Road, Guntur-522006. Guntur-522 007. Pan: Achpb 2189 A (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant In Appeal) (""यथ"/ Respondent / Cross Objector) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

security deposit from the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee’s premises was searched during July, 2019 and no incriminating material was found with respect to this cash transaction in the premises of the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that merely based on the notings