← 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

Shri Singhvi Lickmi Chand, Ambur vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as Revenue

ITA 643/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.643, 644, 645, 646 & 647/Chny/2025 िनधा+रण वष+ /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 Shri Singvi Lickmi Chand, The Dy. Commissioner Of No.3, Kasi Chetty Street, Vs. Income Tax, Ambur – 635 803. Central Circle-3(3), Pan: Aaapl 6736A Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh, Advocate for Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 153ASection 69A

learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that passbook, being a document belonging to an employee and not the appellant, does not qualify as incriminating material under Section 153A. Accordingly, the addition made solely based on its discovery is untenable and deserves to be deleted. ITA Nos.643 to 647/Chny/2025 ... learned CIT(A)-20 erred in not appreciating that the mere discovery of employee passbooks at the appellant's premises does not constitute valid incriminating material under the law. Passbooks belonging to third-party employees, in the absence of any corroborative evidence, do not establish any undisclosed income

M/S. Chatrachaya Property Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, CC-1(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1795/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1795/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Chatrachaya Property Holdings Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited, Studio N - Sy No. 70, Income Tax/Dc, Narne Nagar, Beside Lanco Hills, Central Circle 1(2), Manikonda, Hyderabad 500 075. Chennai. [Pan:Aafcc4753J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Vinita Shah, Ca (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05.12.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.05.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 18, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Besides Challenging The Issue On Merits In Restricting The Addition By The Ld. Cit(A), The Assessee Has Challenged In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short]

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132ASection 153ASection 68

section 153A of the Act. She refers to assessment order and submits there was no search in the case of the assessee and no incriminating material was referred in the assessment order. She argued vehemently that the assessment made in the hands of the assessee without there being search ... incriminating material found or seized in the case of the assessee, is not justified. She refers to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT v. Ramesh D. Patel reported in [2014] 42 taxmann.com 540 (Gujarat) and argued that the provisions under section

Trifecta Projects Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 918/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 271ASection 274Section 37Section 40ASection 40A(3)

available on record. 8. On perusing the assessment order, we came to know that there was a search and based on the search, no incriminating materials were seized to make the additions u/s. 40A(3) and section 37 of the Act. The case of the Page 4 of 7 revenue

Vaksons Metaplast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi

In the result, the appeal, filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2218/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

company on 26.07.2019 and after considering the above information from the assessment order, he observed that there is a categorical finding that certain incriminating materials were found and on analysis of the same, it was found that the assessee indulged in booking bogus purchases and sales of items, such ... time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that assessment was completed u/s 153C of the Act and during search proceedings, certain incriminating material was found. Accordingly, assessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the assessee. During assessment proceedings, Director of the assessee company agreed on oath that

Vaksons Metaplast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi

In the result, the appeal, filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2217/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

company on 26.07.2019 and after considering the above information from the assessment order, he observed that there is a categorical finding that certain incriminating materials were found and on analysis of the same, it was found that the assessee indulged in booking bogus purchases and sales of items, such ... time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that assessment was completed u/s 153C of the Act and during search proceedings, certain incriminating material was found. Accordingly, assessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the assessee. During assessment proceedings, Director of the assessee company agreed on oath that

Vaksons Metaplast Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. PCIT(Central), Delhi

In the result, the appeal, filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2216/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, CIT DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 143Section 153Section 153CSection 234ASection 263Section 69C

company on 26.07.2019 and after considering the above information from the assessment order, he observed that there is a categorical finding that certain incriminating materials were found and on analysis of the same, it was found that the assessee indulged in booking bogus purchases and sales of items, such ... time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that assessment was completed u/s 153C of the Act and during search proceedings, certain incriminating material was found. Accordingly, assessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the assessee. During assessment proceedings, Director of the assessee company agreed on oath that

Vimalarjun Trust, Lucknow vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2094/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year 2017-18 Vimalarjun Trust, Vs. Acit, 2/652, Vikram Khand, Gomti Circle-2, Nagar, Lucknow Delhi Uttar Pradesh Pin: 226010 Pan No. Aabtv7815R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advs. & Shri PawanFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kaushal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153CSection 250

assessee that the additions made by the AO under Section 153C of the Act are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 3 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ... such person, but also demonstrate a clear application of mind by the AO and also 8 specifying the precise assessment year to which the incriminating material relates. A general satisfaction note covering multiple years without identifying the material year-wise is legally unsustainable. The law requires that the Assessing Officer

ACIT-Circle-2(1)(1), Agra vs. Puneet Agarwal, Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 338/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

328ITR400)(P&H HC) iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) Further, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has been found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non deposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction of surrender. 6) That ... opinion, when the case of assessee is covered under the provision of section 153 of the Act and if reliance is placed on the incriminating material found during the course of search of third-party, then provision of section 153C of the Act would be applicable and have

ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Agra vs. Sh. Vishwambhar Dayal Agarwal, Agra

ITA 337/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘DB’: AGRA BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUNIL

ACIT-Circel-2(1)(1), Agra vs. Mayank Agrawal, Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 336/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

328ITR400)(P&H HC) iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) Further, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has been found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non deposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction of surrender. 6) That ... opinion, when the case of assessee is covered under the provision of section 153 of the Act and if reliance is placed on the incriminating material found during the course of search of third-party, then provision of section 153C of the Act would be applicable and have

Vishwambhar Dayal Agarwal, Agra vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 330/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)

328ITR400)(P&H HC) iv) Roshan Lal Sanchiti vs PC IT 2023 452ITR229 (SC) Further, surrender is also based on incriminating material, which has been found and seized from a premise covered under search. Non deposit of post dated cheques does not tantamount to retraction of surrender. 6) That ... opinion, when the case of assessee is covered under the provision of section 153 of the Act and if reliance is placed on the incriminating material found during the course of search of third-party, then provision of section 153C of the Act would be applicable and have

ACIT, CC, Agra vs. Hma Agro Industries Limited, Agra

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 303/AGR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

para 7.5, page 46 of the order. This issue is on the basis of order u/s 148A (d) and, thus, it appears that no incriminating material regarding the above said addition is there and the AO has made an addition to the tune ... meat and meat products by the assessee, he was of the view that this fact was unearthed only during the search, hence, it is incriminating material. Further, he observed that as per the manual of APEDA, the assessee had to get the certificate from the agency certified by APEDA

ACIT, CC, Agra vs. Hma Agro Industries Limited, Agra

ITA 302/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2022-23
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

2 ITA No.251/Agr/2025 and 4 ors. ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. The appeal being ITA No.251/Del/2025 is filed

ACIT, CC, Agra vs. Hma Agro Industries Limited, Agra

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 301/AGR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

para 7.5, page 46 of the order. This issue is on the basis of order u/s 148A (d) and, thus, it appears that no incriminating material regarding the above said addition is there and the AO has made an addition to the tune ... meat and meat products by the assessee, he was of the view that this fact was unearthed only during the search, hence, it is incriminating material. Further, he observed that as per the manual of APEDA, the assessee had to get the certificate from the agency certified by APEDA

ACIT, CC, Agra vs. Hma Agro Industries Limited, Agra

ITA 300/AGR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘DB’: AGRA BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

ACIT, CC, Agra vs. M/S. United Farm Product Private Limited, Agra

In the result, appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 299/AGR/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhacit, Cc, Vs. M/S. United Farm Product Pvt. Ltd., 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002 (Agra) (Pan :Aaccu2505M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Shri Deependra Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 13.10.2025 Date Of Order : 04.12.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Kanpur – 4 Dated 28.03.2025 For Assessment Year2022-23 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “L. Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law. The Ld. Cit(A)-Iv. Kanpur Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,71,37,934/- On Account Of Unexplained Expenditure U/S 69C Of The Act Incurred For Construction Of Plant At Mewat, Haryana, Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Company Itself Has Surrendered Amount Of Rs.41,40,35,700/- & Admitted To Take The Unexplained Expenditure At Rs.43,71,37,934/- Incurred In The 2 Construction Of Said Plant. Hence, The Addition Made By The Ao Is Based On Admittance By The Assessee, Which Is Corroborated By The Incriminating Material Found During The Course Of Search. 2. Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A)-Iv. Kanpur Has Erred In Deleting The Addition. Without Appreciating The Facts That The Assessing Officer Has Passed The Assessment Order After Thoroughly Examining & Analysing The Seized Material & Proper Appreciation Of Facts Of Unexplained Expenditure U/S 69C Of The Act.”

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 69C

construction of said plant. Hence, the addition made by the AO is based on admittance by the assessee, which is corroborated by the incriminating material found during the course of search. 2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A)-IV. Kanpur has erred ... page and para Particulars number of the order passed by the Ld. AO Para 7.1, page 1 to 9 of Summary of so called incriminating material assessment order along with their sample exhibits Para 7.1, page 9 to 12 of Reply filed by assessee in response to SCN assessment order

Hma Agro Industries Limited, Agra vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Agra

In the result, ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is accordingly dismissed

ITA 251/AGR/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhhma Agro Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle, 2/220, 2Nd Floor, Glory Plaza, Agra. Opp. Soor Sadan, M.G. Road, Agra – 282 002. (Pan :Aacch0450J)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40ASection 68

para 7.5, page 46 of the order. This issue is on the basis of order u/s 148A (d) and, thus, it appears that no incriminating material regarding the above said addition is there and the AO has made an addition to the tune ... meat and meat products by the assessee, he was of the view that this fact was unearthed only during the search, hence, it is incriminating material. Further, he observed that as per the manual of APEDA, the assessee had to get the certificate from the agency certified by APEDA

Gurdeep Singh, Delhi vs. Manoj Kumar Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -31, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5306/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153C

Parveen K. Jain and Sh. Vaibhav Jain. His case therefore is that we ought to confirm the impugned addition since based on the specific incriminating material as well as the other evidence found/seized during the course of search. 5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee

Sh. Vivek Gupta, Haryana vs. ACIT/DCIT, Haryana

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

ITA 5037/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Shri Vivek Gupta Vs Acit/Dcit C-5/2A, Opp. C. C. Colony Central Circle Rana Pratap Bagh, North Delhi Karnal Delhi-110007 Pan-Aappg4029A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms. Uma Upadhyay, Ca Respondent By Ms. Amisha S.Gupt, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 04.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04.12.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 29.07.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)-3, Gurgaon [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No.10453/2019-20 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 29.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That A Search & Seizure Operation U/S 132 Were Carried Out At The Business Premises Of M/S. Oswal Group Of Cases, Karnal & Residential Premises Of Its Members On 22.01.2018. The Case Of The Assessee Was Also Covered U/S 132 Of The Act. Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 28.07.2018 Declaring Total Income Of Inr 13,36,300/-. Thereafter, Statutory Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Was Issued On 23.04.2019 Followed By Notices U/S 142(1) Of The Act Alongwith Questionnaire Issued From Time To Time. In Response To Above, Assessee Filed Replies. Thereafter, The Ao Passed The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Of The Act Dated 29.12.2019 Assessing Total Income Of The Assessee At Inr 81,59,730/-.

Section 115BSection 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153DSection 250Section 69Section 69A

rejecting the contention of the assessee that the additions made by the AO are bad in law in the absence of any incriminating material belonging to the assessee being found during the course of the search. 5. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam vs. Gva Industries Pvt. Ltd., Dhamtari

Accordingly, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed and

ITA 223/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Kishore Kumar Vs DCIT (2015) 62 Taxmann.com2 15/234 Taxmann 771, where in it was held that even a sworn statement shall also constitute incriminating material to dislodge any earlier finding for the purpose of making an assessment u/s 153A. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the decision