← 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

Hadoti Mining & Exports Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1343/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2010-11
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 50C

Mining & Exports Pvt. Ltd., 2. The assessee has raised the preliminary objection that addition has been made in the assessment without reference to any incriminating material in respect of addition made u/s.50C of the Act. 3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find ... order of the ld. CIT(A) in respect of addition made u/s.50C of the Act, there is absolutely no reference to any incriminating material found during the course of search relatable to that addition. The law is very well settled that in respect of concluded assessments, no addition could

Dr. P. Dayananda Pai, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 150/BANG/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jul 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year :2005-06 Dr. P Dayananda Pai, Vs. Dcit, 10/1, Lakshminarayana Complex, Circle – 2(2), Palace Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 052. Pan : Abapp 4418 Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. R. Ramakrishnan, Ca Revenue By : Smt. Susan Dolores George, Cit(Osd)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 9.12.2019 Of Cit(A)-11, Bengaluru, Relating To Ay 2005-06. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual. He Is Also Referred To As “Pdp” In This Order. He Is In The Business Of Real Estate For Over Four Decades. He Carried On Business Of Real Estate In His Individual Capacity. From Ay 95-96 He Transferred All The Rights In Properties Under Various Agreements To A Partnership Firm “M/S.P.Dayanand Pai”, Vide Deed Of Partnership Dated 1-4-1994. In This Firm Mr.P.Dayanand Pai & His Brother Mr.P.Satish & 9 Other Individuals Were Partners. Thereafter By A Deed Of Partnership Dated 9.6.2000 The Firm “M/S.P.Dayanada Pai” Merged Its Business With Another Partnership Firm “M/S.Canara Housing Development Company” (Hereinafter Page 2 Of 39

For Appellant: Shri. R. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Susan Dolores George, CIT(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10Section 132Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 153Section 153A

assessee, giving scope for the department to frame a proper assessment in the hands of the real person to whom the alleged seized incriminating materials belongs to. Time and again during the course of assessment proceedings, evidence was let into show that the alleged escaped income was already factored

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC--1(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 251/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kant, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

made under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act. The ITAT has allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that no incriminating material pertaining to the assessee was found under the year under consideration. Thereafter, the AO has passed an order giving effect ... assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 and decided the issue in favour of the assessee holding that in the absence of any incriminating material no addition or disallowance can be made in the assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act in case of non abated assessment. 7. While

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC--1(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 250/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kant, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

made under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act. The ITAT has allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that no incriminating material pertaining to the assessee was found under the year under consideration. Thereafter, the AO has passed an order giving effect ... assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 and decided the issue in favour of the assessee holding that in the absence of any incriminating material no addition or disallowance can be made in the assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act in case of non abated assessment. 7. While

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC--1(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 249/MUM/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kant, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

made under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act. The ITAT has allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that no incriminating material pertaining to the assessee was found under the year under consideration. Thereafter, the AO has passed an order giving effect ... assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 and decided the issue in favour of the assessee holding that in the absence of any incriminating material no addition or disallowance can be made in the assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act in case of non abated assessment. 7. While

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC--1(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 248/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Manish Kant, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153C

made under section 153C read with section 143(3) of the Act. The ITAT has allowed the appeal of the assessee holding that no incriminating material pertaining to the assessee was found under the year under consideration. Thereafter, the AO has passed an order giving effect ... assessment year 2008-09 to 2010-11 and decided the issue in favour of the assessee holding that in the absence of any incriminating material no addition or disallowance can be made in the assessment proceedings under section 153C of the Act in case of non abated assessment. 7. While

Shree Nirman Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue are dismissed

ITA 1532/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. DanielFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153C

partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. 7. In appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee has raised several other grounds relating to no incriminating material found during search, the order passed u/s. 153 of the Act is invalid; the Assessing Officer has passed the Assessment Order u/s. 153C r.w.s ... Group and above said group is carrying on three projects namely Shakti Villa, Shree Rudra and Shakti Lake City. During search revenue had found incriminating material relating to the above projects and Assessing Officer has estimated the profit in the project Shakti Lake City @45.76% and he adopted the same

Shree Nirman Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue are dismissed

ITA 1530/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri P. DanielFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Damor
Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153C

partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. 7. In appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee has raised several other grounds relating to no incriminating material found during search, the order passed u/s. 153 of the Act is invalid; the Assessing Officer has passed the Assessment Order u/s. 153C r.w.s ... Group and above said group is carrying on three projects namely Shakti Villa, Shree Rudra and Shakti Lake City. During search revenue had found incriminating material relating to the above projects and Assessing Officer has estimated the profit in the project Shakti Lake City @45.76% and he adopted the same

J.K.Files (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cir-8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1654/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 132Section 153C

action of the AO, wherein additions were made by the AO to the income of the appellant u/s 153C in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search action taken u/s 132 of the Act, The action of the CIT(A) suffers from legal infirmity and therefore ... allowed the claim of deduction of commission expenses. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that the AO has not brought on record any incriminating material found pertaining to the assessee to establish that no services were rendered by the commission agents. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that assessee

J.K.Files (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cir 8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1653/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 132Section 153C

action of the AO, wherein additions were made by the AO to the income of the appellant u/s 153C in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search action taken u/s 132 of the Act, The action of the CIT(A) suffers from legal infirmity and therefore ... allowed the claim of deduction of commission expenses. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that the AO has not brought on record any incriminating material found pertaining to the assessee to establish that no services were rendered by the commission agents. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that assessee

J.K.Files (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cir-8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1652/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 132Section 153C

action of the AO, wherein additions were made by the AO to the income of the appellant u/s 153C in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search action taken u/s 132 of the Act, The action of the CIT(A) suffers from legal infirmity and therefore ... allowed the claim of deduction of commission expenses. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that the AO has not brought on record any incriminating material found pertaining to the assessee to establish that no services were rendered by the commission agents. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that assessee

J.K.Files (India ) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cir -8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1651/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta, D.R
Section 132Section 153C

action of the AO, wherein additions were made by the AO to the income of the appellant u/s 153C in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search action taken u/s 132 of the Act, The action of the CIT(A) suffers from legal infirmity and therefore ... allowed the claim of deduction of commission expenses. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that the AO has not brought on record any incriminating material found pertaining to the assessee to establish that no services were rendered by the commission agents. The Ld. Counsel has also submitted that assessee

Mehul Gems Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-1(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the different assessees are allowed in terms as indicated above

ITA 384/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 384/Mum/2022 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16)

For Appellant: Shri Suchek Anchaliya &For Respondent: Shri Mahita Nair, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 251(2)

fact, the assessee remained absent during search proceedings for 3 days. The -summons were not complied with and no explanation was furnished on incriminating material. Pertinently, voluminous hand written estimation sheets have been found at various premises of the assessee. The sheets have been admitted to be in the hand ... possession of Shri Rohit Birawat a( CST Terminus who was apprehended by the search team while attempting to flee, from Mumbai to Rajasthan with incriminating material 7. All these facts have been admitted not only by the assessee but also by his son as well as trusted employees in various

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 509/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

recorded based on the materials seized during the course of search which are said to be incriminating in nature and in the absence of incriminating materials or in the absence of such recording, no notice under section 153A of the Act should have been issued on the facts and circumstances ... questioned the validity of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 153A of the Act. The contention of the appellant is that no incriminating material was found and seized during the search conducted in the premises of the appellant. Thus, appellant contends question of assessing any income u/s 153A does

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 508/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

recorded based on the materials seized during the course of search which are said to be incriminating in nature and in the absence of incriminating materials or in the absence of such recording, no notice under section 153A of the Act should have been issued on the facts and circumstances ... questioned the validity of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 153A of the Act. The contention of the appellant is that no incriminating material was found and seized during the search conducted in the premises of the appellant. Thus, appellant contends question of assessing any income u/s 153A does

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 501/BANG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

recorded based on the materials seized during the course of search which are said to be incriminating in nature and in the absence of incriminating materials or in the absence of such recording, no notice under section 153A of the Act should have been issued on the facts and circumstances ... questioned the validity of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 153A of the Act. The contention of the appellant is that no incriminating material was found and seized during the search conducted in the premises of the appellant. Thus, appellant contends question of assessing any income u/s 153A does

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 500/BANG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

recorded based on the materials seized during the course of search which are said to be incriminating in nature and in the absence of incriminating materials or in the absence of such recording, no notice under section 153A of the Act should have been issued on the facts and circumstances ... questioned the validity of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 153A of the Act. The contention of the appellant is that no incriminating material was found and seized during the search conducted in the premises of the appellant. Thus, appellant contends question of assessing any income u/s 153A does

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. M/S. Gokula Education Foundation (Medical), Bengaluru

In the result, revenue appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 499/BANG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Chakrapani, D.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar, A.R
Section 132Section 143Section 153A

recorded based on the materials seized during the course of search which are said to be incriminating in nature and in the absence of incriminating materials or in the absence of such recording, no notice under section 153A of the Act should have been issued on the facts and circumstances ... questioned the validity of assumption of jurisdiction by the AO u/s 153A of the Act. The contention of the appellant is that no incriminating material was found and seized during the search conducted in the premises of the appellant. Thus, appellant contends question of assessing any income u/s 153A does

Shrirang Vijay Rao, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-35(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 812/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year: 2015-16 Shrirang Vijay Rao, Dy. Commissioner Of C-902, Mulund Shangrilla Chs, Vs. Income Tax-35(3), Mumbai. Near Saidham Temple, P.K. Road, Mulund (East), Mumbai-400 080 Pan Agipr6004K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, (D.R.)
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69

respect of shops comes to ` 6,50,10,096/-. For the rest of the addition in respect of which no incriminating material was found, we noted from pages 439 to 441 of the paper book, the Assessing Officer just estimated the on-money of the flat ... that of the shops @26,000/- totaling to Rs. 9,97,40,450/-. But the Assessing Officer was fair enough to state that no incriminating material was found but had estimate @15750/- per sq. ft for flats and @26000/- per sq. ft. for shops. This is a case where assessment

DCIT- CC- 2(4), Mumbai vs. Shruti Art Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA No.2647/Mum/2016 2007-08

ITA 2649/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2009-10
Section 132(1)Section 143(3)

expired and hence, the assessment for A.Y.2009-10 becomes a pending proceedings which gets abated. Hence, there is absolutely no requirement of any incriminating material for the purpose of framing assessment u/s.153A of the Act for the said assessment year. 3.1. The assessee is engaged in the business of offset, screen ... were not satisfied in the instant case to frame the search assessment u/s.153A of the Act; that there were no incriminating materials found during the course of search in order to frame the assessment u/s.153A of the Act and that the search assessment has been framed in violation of provisions