← 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

Satyam Gupta Araveeti, Prakasham District vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ongole

ITA 346/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

false or improbable and also erred in making the addition based on mere conjectures, surmises and suspicions and in the absence of any incriminating material available on the part of the Appellant on these grounds of appeal. 5. The Appellant prays to the Honourable ITAT for justice

Srinivas Chowdary Vallabhaneni, Secunderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

ITA 1461/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.1461/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2019-20)

For Appellant: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Reema Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 271Section 271ASection 274

additional income declared by the respective assessees to higher rate as per the provisions of section 115BBE is not justified especially when no other incriminating material was found, meaning that it is not undisclosed income. Further in the case of Appellant the income is declared with respect to Investment ... No.177/Hyd/2023 placed at page no. 78 of the paper book, he submitted that this Tribunal had given a categorical factual finding that no incriminating material was found for the addition of Rs.28 lakhs, and on that basis directed the Ld. AO to tax the same under normal rate

Rajeswara Rao Anne, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1438/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CA
Section 11ISection 132Section 132(4)Section 271Section 271ASection 274

declared by the respective assessees to tax at higher rate as per the provisions of section 11ISBBE is not justified especially when no other incriminating material was found, meaning that it is not undisclosed income. 7. The appellant craves leave of the Hon'ble Tribunal to amend OR raise ... duly included the amount in her return of income filed under section 139(1), paying taxes thereon. The Ld. AR submitted that no incriminating material was found during search in relation to the sum of Rs.24 lakhs. He invited our attention to para no. 12 of the Tribunal’s consolidated

Anne Manoj Chowdary, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Center Circle-1(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1437/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1437/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Anne Manoj Chowdary Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Central Circle 1(4) Pan:Ainpc5963B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Phaneendra Nag, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Waseem Ur Rehman, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Phaneendra Nag, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Waseem UR Rehman, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 69A

duly included the amount in her return of income filed under section 139(1), paying taxes thereon. The Ld. AR submitted that no incriminating material was found during search in relation to the sum of Rs.21 lakhs. He invited our attention to para nos. 12 to 14 of the Tribunal ... addition in ITA No.176/Hyd/2023 placed at page nos. 77 & 78 of the paper book, wherein this Tribunal recorded a categorical factual finding that no incriminating material was found for the addition of Rs.21 lakhs, and accordingly directed the Ld. AO to tax the said sum at normal rates

K C Raju Multi Speciality Hospital, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1056/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 234B

factual basis and . ITA Nos.1055 - 1056/Bang/2025 Page 8 of 31 was offered only to conclude the proceedings. Even for years where there was no incriminating material, such declaration was made under pressure. However, the assessee has otherwise fully accounted for all receipts. 4.16 Without prejudice, the assessee has already offered ... confessions during search. 7.4 The learned CIT(A) after considering the facts in totality observed that the search and seizure operation clearly brought out incriminating materials in the form of two parallel sets of Tally data for the same period. One set reflected lower receipts as per the return

K C Raju Multi Speciality Hospital, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1055/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 234B

factual basis and . ITA Nos.1055 - 1056/Bang/2025 Page 8 of 31 was offered only to conclude the proceedings. Even for years where there was no incriminating material, such declaration was made under pressure. However, the assessee has otherwise fully accounted for all receipts. 4.16 Without prejudice, the assessee has already offered ... confessions during search. 7.4 The learned CIT(A) after considering the facts in totality observed that the search and seizure operation clearly brought out incriminating materials in the form of two parallel sets of Tally data for the same period. One set reflected lower receipts as per the return

JCIT(OSD), Jhandewalan vs. Narendra Aggarwal, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1017/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwaljcit (Osd), Jhandewalan, Vs. Narendra Aggarwal, Delhi H.No. 467, Sector-21-A, Fardidabad, Haryana (Pan: Aagpa1441D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr.Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv., Saksham Agarwal, Ca & Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.11.2025 Date Of Order : 19.12.2025 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

For Appellant: Dr.Rakesh Gupta, Adv., Sh. Somil AgarwalFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263Section 68

grounds on merit, the technical grounds are decided first. 6.2 The technical grounds are summarized as under. First, in the absence of any incriminating material found/seized during the course of search on a third party, no proceedings U/S.153C could have been initiated for A,Y 2015-16. Apparently, Appellant ... year under consideration i.e. AY 2015-16, being an unabated year, no proceeding under section 153C of the Act would be initiated without any incriminating material found/seized. Third, as per the satisfaction note, the purported 5 incriminating documents of cash transactions relate to AY 2016-17 and therefore, no proceeding

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. M B Power (Madhya Pradesh) Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 267/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Lodha, are matched with the fund siphoned off. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that incriminating material on the basis of which satisfaction note was drawn by the AO, does not pertain to A.Υ 2016-17 whereas the incriminating material clearly ... give true and full disclosure to the facts. As per ld. AR the entries contained in the excel sheets cannot be held as incriminating material more particularly when no reference of any such sheets was made in the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee nor any satisfaction

Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 211/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Lodha, are matched with the fund siphoned off. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that incriminating material on the basis of which satisfaction note was drawn by the AO, does not pertain to A.Υ 2016-17 whereas the incriminating material clearly ... give true and full disclosure to the facts. As per ld. AR the entries contained in the excel sheets cannot be held as incriminating material more particularly when no reference of any such sheets was made in the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee nor any satisfaction

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3923/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Lodha, are matched with the fund siphoned off. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that incriminating material on the basis of which satisfaction note was drawn by the AO, does not pertain to A.Υ 2016-17 whereas the incriminating material clearly ... give true and full disclosure to the facts. As per ld. AR the entries contained in the excel sheets cannot be held as incriminating material more particularly when no reference of any such sheets was made in the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee nor any satisfaction

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-20, Delhi vs. M. B. Power (Madhaya Pradesh) Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3874/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Lodha, are matched with the fund siphoned off. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that incriminating material on the basis of which satisfaction note was drawn by the AO, does not pertain to A.Υ 2016-17 whereas the incriminating material clearly ... give true and full disclosure to the facts. As per ld. AR the entries contained in the excel sheets cannot be held as incriminating material more particularly when no reference of any such sheets was made in the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee nor any satisfaction

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 20, Delhi vs. M.B. Power (Madhaya Pradesh) Ltd, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3870/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Lodha, are matched with the fund siphoned off. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that incriminating material on the basis of which satisfaction note was drawn by the AO, does not pertain to A.Υ 2016-17 whereas the incriminating material clearly ... give true and full disclosure to the facts. As per ld. AR the entries contained in the excel sheets cannot be held as incriminating material more particularly when no reference of any such sheets was made in the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee nor any satisfaction

Mb Power (Madhya Pradesh) Limited, South East Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-20, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3850/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] M.B.Power (Madhya Pradesh) Vs Dcit, Ltd., 239, Okhla Industrial Central Circle-2, Estate, Nehru Place, Gurgaon Delhi -110019. Pan-Aafcm6698A Appellant Respondent

Section 132(4)Section 143(2)Section 153CSection 250

Lodha, are matched with the fund siphoned off. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that incriminating material on the basis of which satisfaction note was drawn by the AO, does not pertain to A.Υ 2016-17 whereas the incriminating material clearly ... give true and full disclosure to the facts. As per ld. AR the entries contained in the excel sheets cannot be held as incriminating material more particularly when no reference of any such sheets was made in the satisfaction note recorded in the case of the assessee nor any satisfaction

Healing Touch Hospital, Gaya vs. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Patna

In the result, the captioned appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 471/PAT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Years: 2019-20 Healing Tough Hospital..………………. ……………..…..........……….Appellant South Church Road, Gandhi Maidan, Near Government Bus Stand, Gaya, Bihar – 823001. [Pan: Aaifh8721M] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-1, Patna…………..……. ……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Vishal Kr., Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 18, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2019-20 Against The Order Dated 28.08.2025 Of The Cit(A)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

operation u/s 133A was conducted in the case of Dr. Vimlendu Vimal, Dr. Dipawali Vimal and Healing Touch Hospital. During the course of survey, incriminating materials in the form of certain receipt books and registers were found and impounded, which indicated that the assessee had suppressed substantial receipts from hospital

Anil Kumar, Una vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Una

ITA 121/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: FixedITAT Chandigarh18 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Krinwant Sahay, Am M.A. No. 121/Chandi/2025 [In Ita No.25/Chandi/2022] (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Central Circle-1, M/S Oswal Apparels Pvt. Ltd., बनाम/ Vs. Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaco-9177-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Gaurav Sharma (Ca) ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) Sr. Dr (Virtual)

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Sharma (CA)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) Sr. DR (Virtual)
Section 254(2)

Section 132A, the AO 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 AO would assume the jurisdiction to assess or reassess the ‘total income’ taking into consideration ... incriminating material unearthed during the search and the other material available with the AO including the income declared in the returns: and iv. in Case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessment/unabated

Sushil Mitruka, Siliguri vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2178/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

bank accounts? If the AO could have found any weakness in the explanation of the assessee or AO is in a possession of any incriminating material against the assessee, inference may be different. But in this case, the AO has not made out any case to say that the said

Sushil Mitruka, Darjeeling vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1631/KOL/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

bank accounts? If the AO could have found any weakness in the explanation of the assessee or AO is in a possession of any incriminating material against the assessee, inference may be different. But in this case, the AO has not made out any case to say that the said

Sushil Mitruka, Darjeeling vs. DCIT, Circle 1, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals

ITA 1630/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

bank accounts? If the AO could have found any weakness in the explanation of the assessee or AO is in a possession of any incriminating material against the assessee, inference may be different. But in this case, the AO has not made out any case to say that the said

DCIT, Circle-1, Siliguri vs. Sushil Mitruka, Siliguri

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1613/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 139(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148(2)

bank accounts? If the AO could have found any weakness in the explanation of the assessee or AO is in a possession of any incriminating material against the assessee, inference may be different. But in this case, the AO has not made out any case to say that the said

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Subramaniam Kathiresan, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for AY 2014-15 is dismissed

ITA 899/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 132Section 153Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 153C

search and seizure operation was conducted in the case of Shri G N Anbuchezhian and others on 05.02.2020. During the search proceedings, various incriminating material being loose sheet, Book & Documents and Electronic devices were seized. On examination of Incriminating material seized vide annexure no. ANN/PP/RA/LS/S-30 & 38 from Shri. Aravindan Ramalingam ... Society (2017), 84 Taxmann.com 290 (SC), wherein it was held that, the assessment was completed U/ s. 153C without establishing any correlation with the incriminating material seized but in the present case the assessment was Subramaniam Kathiresan :: 7 :: completed based on the incriminating material seized, hence, the same is very