← 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

Radhey Shyam Bansal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1793/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

rejecting the contention of the assessee that the additions made under Section 153A are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred ... that the credits in the bank accounts of the clients of the assessee have been added to the income of the assessee despite no incriminating material was found during the course of search. Referring to various bank accounts, he submitted that there is double addition of the bank deposits

Radhey Shyam Bansal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1792/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

rejecting the contention of the assessee that the additions made under Section 153A are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred ... that the credits in the bank accounts of the clients of the assessee have been added to the income of the assessee despite no incriminating material was found during the course of search. Referring to various bank accounts, he submitted that there is double addition of the bank deposits

Radhey Shyam Bansal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1791/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

rejecting the contention of the assessee that the additions made under Section 153A are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred ... that the credits in the bank accounts of the clients of the assessee have been added to the income of the assessee despite no incriminating material was found during the course of search. Referring to various bank accounts, he submitted that there is double addition of the bank deposits

Radhey Shyam Bansal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1790/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

rejecting the contention of the assessee that the additions made under Section 153A are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred ... that the credits in the bank accounts of the clients of the assessee have been added to the income of the assessee despite no incriminating material was found during the course of search. Referring to various bank accounts, he submitted that there is double addition of the bank deposits

Radhey Shyam Bansal, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1789/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 131Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

rejecting the contention of the assessee that the additions made under Section 153A are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred ... that the credits in the bank accounts of the clients of the assessee have been added to the income of the assessee despite no incriminating material was found during the course of search. Referring to various bank accounts, he submitted that there is double addition of the bank deposits

DCIT, Central Circle, Noida vs. Ypt Entertainment House P. Ltd., Patiala

In the result, the appeal by Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the Assessee; both are dismissed

ITA 3764/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jaspreet Singh Minhas, CIT(DR)
Section 153C

contention of the assessee that the proceedings initiated under Section 153C are bad in law and without jurisdiction in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ... liable to be quashed in the absence of any satisfaction being recorded by the AO of the searched person that the incriminating material belonging to the assessee was found during the course of the search. 4. That the respondent craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Accurate Meters Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5866/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5866/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 5312/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Dcit, Vs M/S Accurate Meters Ltd., 8, Local Shopping Centre, 2Nd & Central Circle-22, 3Rd Floor, Vardhman Sidharth New Delhi Plaza, Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6996J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.09.2021

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 37

Rs.35.69 Crores made to SEBs. The ld. CIT (A) gave a categorical finding that the amount has been added on estimate basis and no incriminating material is found or seized. The ld. CIT (A) has also held that the expenses have not been claimed in the books of accounts

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Accurate Meters Ltd., Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5312/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 5866/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2002-03 Ita No. 5312/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year : 2003-04 Dcit, Vs M/S Accurate Meters Ltd., 8, Local Shopping Centre, 2Nd & Central Circle-22, 3Rd Floor, Vardhman Sidharth New Delhi Plaza, Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaca6996J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Satpal Gulati, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.07.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.09.2021

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Satpal Gulati, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 37

Rs.35.69 Crores made to SEBs. The ld. CIT (A) gave a categorical finding that the amount has been added on estimate basis and no incriminating material is found or seized. The ld. CIT (A) has also held that the expenses have not been claimed in the books of accounts

Saurabh Singla, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 36(4), New Delhi

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

ITA 3815/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15 Saurabh Singla, Vs Ito, K-2, Second Floor, Model Town-Ii, Ward-36(4), New Delhi-110009. New Delhi. Pan-Amops7206A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Sh. Suresh K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Ms. Alka Gautam, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 26.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 31.08.2021

Section 10(38)Section 68Section 69C

addition of Rs.23,27,375/- which is bad in law as the same has been made without the appellant being provided with the incriminating material and cross examination of the material and statements on the basis of which the Investment of the appellant is characterized as penny stock

J.D. Sons Steel Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1061/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Takiyar, Sr.D.R
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 68

accommodation entry operating racket prevalent in the country involving sum of crores of rupees, beneficiaries running into thousands of individuals and companies. Lot of incriminating material was found which (which I shall refer during course of hearing) was followed by extensive bank inquiries and recording of statements of the involved ... organized and report was generated which was passed over to the field units for necessary action along with copy of seized annexures of the incriminating material. In case of the assessee the complete details of the amount of accommodation entries taken in garb of share application money taken, the details

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ngenox Technologies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5099/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri K.N. Chary[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2006-07

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 154Section 2

were already completed prior to the date of search and, therefore, in the return of income filed under section 153A, only addition based on incriminating material could have been done and no other adjustment is permitted under the law. In support of his contention, he relied on the decision ... cannot be treated as non est. In such completed assessments, addition if any can be made on the 7 basis of the income relating incriminating material otherwise the position accepted in completed assessment has to reiterate. The word “so far as may be” in section 153A(1)(a) applies

M G Metalloy Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

ITA 3306/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Mg Metalloy Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Dcit, B-16, Sector-2, Noida, Central Circle, Pan: Aagcm5789D Noida (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 394Section 68

Joint Commissioner [Approving Authority] is required to see that whether the additions have been made in the hands of assessee are based properly on incriminating material found during the course of search, observations/comments in the appraisal report, the seized documents and further enquiries made by the A.O. during the course ... assessments have been abated. Therefore, for each unabated and abated assessments, the authorities below and the Approving Authority [JCIT] shall have to verify the incriminating material found during the course of search or the seized material if pertain to the same assessment year and its basis. The assessee has explained

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3261/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 132

Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the AO was not justified to make the addition of GP as no incriminating material was found during search without appreciating that the AO has made addition based on seized/incriminating documents in respect of cash transfers/bogus purchases. 6. That ... with this order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A. The assessee challenge before the learned CIT – A that during the search no incriminating material was found which was rejected by the learned CIT – A holding that once the search has been conducted u/s 132 of the income

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3260/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 132

Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the AO was not justified to make the addition of GP as no incriminating material was found during search without appreciating that the AO has made addition based on seized/incriminating documents in respect of cash transfers/bogus purchases. 6. That ... with this order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A. The assessee challenge before the learned CIT – A that during the search no incriminating material was found which was rejected by the learned CIT – A holding that once the search has been conducted u/s 132 of the income

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3259/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 132

Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the AO was not justified to make the addition of GP as no incriminating material was found during search without appreciating that the AO has made addition based on seized/incriminating documents in respect of cash transfers/bogus purchases. 6. That ... with this order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A. The assessee challenge before the learned CIT – A that during the search no incriminating material was found which was rejected by the learned CIT – A holding that once the search has been conducted u/s 132 of the income

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3258/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 132

Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the AO was not justified to make the addition of GP as no incriminating material was found during search without appreciating that the AO has made addition based on seized/incriminating documents in respect of cash transfers/bogus purchases. 6. That ... with this order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A. The assessee challenge before the learned CIT – A that during the search no incriminating material was found which was rejected by the learned CIT – A holding that once the search has been conducted u/s 132 of the income

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Pilot Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the learned assessing officer are dismissed

ITA 3257/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 132

Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the AO was not justified to make the addition of GP as no incriminating material was found during search without appreciating that the AO has made addition based on seized/incriminating documents in respect of cash transfers/bogus purchases. 6. That ... with this order preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A. The assessee challenge before the learned CIT – A that during the search no incriminating material was found which was rejected by the learned CIT – A holding that once the search has been conducted u/s 132 of the income

Hitchki Creation Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 3104/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Ita Nos. 3104, 3105, 3106 & 3107/Del/2018 (Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Hitchki Creation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit 1St Floor, Plot No.9, 101, Central Circle Community Centre, Noida Sikka Complex, Preet Vihar, New Delhi – 110092 Pan No. Aacch 4195 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv. Shri Deepash Garg, Adv. Revenue By Shri Najmi, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.08.2021 Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Consolidated Order Dated 31.10.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Kanpur Relating To Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. 2 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Learned Ar Submitted That Though The Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are For Four Different Assessment Years, But The Issue Involved In All The Four Appeals Are Identical & He Has Common Submissions To Make. The Aforesaid Contention Of Learned Ar Has Not Been Controverted By Revenue. In View Of The Aforesaid Facts, We For The Sake Of Convenience Proceed To Dispose Of All The Four Appeals By A Consolidated Order But For The Sake Of Reference Refer To The Facts For A.Y. 2012-13. 3. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 43B

loan debited to profit & loss account are not genuine / bogus and without any basis, material or evidence and more so when there was no incriminating material found as a result of search. 4) That in any case and in any view of the matter, action

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Aakriti Hotels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 281/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Joshi, CA
Section 153ASection 68

response the assessee has filed its return of income on 17.07.2013. The ld. Assessing Officer without even referring to any seized document or any incriminating material found during the course of search, has proceeded to make the assessment on the basis of perusal of the audited balance sheet as discussed ... abate as per 2nd proviso to Section 153A. Legally speaking, no addition could be made, which was not based on incriminating material seized during search in the case of a concluded assessment. ITA No.281 & 282/DEL/2015 7 Thus, from the order itself and from records, it is very clear that

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Smt. Ginni Devi, New Delhi

ITA 3242/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3145 /Del/2017 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Ginni Devi Vs. Dcit E-270, Shastri Nagar, Central Circle – 25 New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Accpd 2043 E (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 3242/Del/2017 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Dcit Vs. Ginni Devi Central Circle – 25 E-270, Shastri Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Accpd 2043 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hiren Mehta, C.A. Revenue By Shri Najmi, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 11.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.08.2021

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

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. KULDIP