← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Agra vs. Shri Rakesh Kumar, Kanpur

In the result, ITA Nos. 431, 437 & 432/Agr/2024 filed by the revenue

ITA 432/AGR/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

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

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250(6)

account of cash loan taken from M/s Ghanaram Infra-engineers Pvt. Ltd without appreciating the fact that the addition was based on the incriminating material found and seized during the course of search and seizure and the assessee failed to explain the contents of the incriminating material. 2. Whether ... 448/Agr/2024 appreciating the fact that the addition was made on the basis of the incriminating material found and seized during the course of search and seizure action and the assessee was not able to explain the relevant entry and contents of the incriminating material. 4. Whether on facts and circumstances

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Agra vs. Shri Rakesh Kumar, Kanpur

In the result, ITA Nos. 431, 437 & 432/Agr/2024 filed by the revenue

ITA 431/AGR/2024[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025

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

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 250(6)

account of cash loan taken from M/s Ghanaram Infra-engineers Pvt. Ltd without appreciating the fact that the addition was based on the incriminating material found and seized during the course of search and seizure and the assessee failed to explain the contents of the incriminating material. 2. Whether ... 448/Agr/2024 appreciating the fact that the addition was made on the basis of the incriminating material found and seized during the course of search and seizure action and the assessee was not able to explain the relevant entry and contents of the incriminating material. 4. Whether on facts and circumstances

Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur vs. Rahul Kathuria, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 152/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148

quashed. 19. Let us examine the other contention raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that since in the case of the assessee, incriminating material 25 ITO/ITO-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) Vs. Rahul Kathuria ITA Nos. 151 & 152/RPR/2025 as alleged by the Revenue have been unearthed from the premises ... information collected during search conducted in the premises of another assessee. Collection of details relating to search would not mean collection of new incriminating material and information, independent of the incriminating material and information collected during search proceedings. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioner is correct in submitting that

Income Tax Officer, Raipur vs. Rahul Kathuria, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 151/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.151 & 152/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2018-19 & 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer/Income Tax Officer-3(1) Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148

quashed. 19. Let us examine the other contention raised by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that since in the case of the assessee, incriminating material 25 ITO/ITO-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) Vs. Rahul Kathuria ITA Nos. 151 & 152/RPR/2025 as alleged by the Revenue have been unearthed from the premises ... information collected during search conducted in the premises of another assessee. Collection of details relating to search would not mean collection of new incriminating material and information, independent of the incriminating material and information collected during search proceedings. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioner is correct in submitting that

Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi, Visakhapatnam vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 384/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.384/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16) Gattula Lakshmi Madhavi Vs. Assistant Commissioner Visakhapatnam. Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Pan: Agfpg8929H Visakhapatnam. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid Hearing) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 28/02/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “Act”), Dated 16/03/2022 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

were conducted on 21/03/2019, in the case of the assessee’s husband, Sri G.V. Harikrishna and during the course of the survey proceedings, incriminating material pertaining to the assessee were found which revealed that he had during the subject year carried out certain immovable property transactions. Thereafter, the AO issued

V S A Infra Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 906/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

that the notice under Section 153A and consequently the order under Section 153A are invalid. 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, as no incriminating material was found or seized in the searched premises belonging to the assessee indicating any escapement of income, the assessment is not liable to abate ... Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was also conducted in the case of the assessee. 4. During the course of search, no incriminating material pertains to the assessee was found and seized, except a bank account statement maintained with Axis Bank Ltd., with account number 19301030000116. During

V S A Infra Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 905/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

that the notice under Section 153A and consequently the order under Section 153A are invalid. 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, as no incriminating material was found or seized in the searched premises belonging to the assessee indicating any escapement of income, the assessment is not liable to abate ... Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was also conducted in the case of the assessee. 4. During the course of search, no incriminating material pertains to the assessee was found and seized, except a bank account statement maintained with Axis Bank Ltd., with account number 19301030000116. During

V S A Infra Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 904/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

that the notice under Section 153A and consequently the order under Section 153A are invalid. 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, as no incriminating material was found or seized in the searched premises belonging to the assessee indicating any escapement of income, the assessment is not liable to abate ... Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was also conducted in the case of the assessee. 4. During the course of search, no incriminating material pertains to the assessee was found and seized, except a bank account statement maintained with Axis Bank Ltd., with account number 19301030000116. During

V S A Infra Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 903/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

that the notice under Section 153A and consequently the order under Section 153A are invalid. 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, as no incriminating material was found or seized in the searched premises belonging to the assessee indicating any escapement of income, the assessment is not liable to abate ... Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was also conducted in the case of the assessee. 4. During the course of search, no incriminating material pertains to the assessee was found and seized, except a bank account statement maintained with Axis Bank Ltd., with account number 19301030000116. During

V S A Infra Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle -1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 902/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 132ASection 133ASection 143(3)Section 153A

that the notice under Section 153A and consequently the order under Section 153A are invalid. 8. Without prejudice to the above grounds, as no incriminating material was found or seized in the searched premises belonging to the assessee indicating any escapement of income, the assessment is not liable to abate ... Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was also conducted in the case of the assessee. 4. During the course of search, no incriminating material pertains to the assessee was found and seized, except a bank account statement maintained with Axis Bank Ltd., with account number 19301030000116. During

Balatripura Sundari Donepudi, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle - 1(4), Hyderabad

ITA 556/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No. 556/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17) Balatripura Sundari Vs. Deputy Commissioner Donepudi, Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-1(4), Pan: Afhpd2082B Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr. AR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

ought to have appreciated that the AO erred in invoking the provisions of Sec 153C of the I.T Act, there being no incriminating material belonging to the appellant. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the notice issued u/s 153C of the Act is based on loose ... sheets and unsigned letter heads, which cannot take the character of incriminating material and would not meet the requirement of concept of "satisfaction" used in section 153C of the Act. 7. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs 8,231/- towards difference amount in Pension income

Kondal Reddy Anumula, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 286/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the additions made, which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- 4. The Appellate Commissioner erred in changing the charging section from ... challenged the addition made by the A.O. towards opening capital under Section 68 of the Act, as unexplained cash credit in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and claimed that, the additions made by the A.O. cannot be sustained. The assessee had also contested

Kondal Reddy Anumula, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle - 1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 285/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the additions made, which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- 4. The Appellate Commissioner erred in changing the charging section from ... challenged the addition made by the A.O. towards opening capital under Section 68 of the Act, as unexplained cash credit in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and claimed that, the additions made by the A.O. cannot be sustained. The assessee had also contested

Kondal Reddy Anumula, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle- 1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 284/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the additions made, which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- 4. The Appellate Commissioner erred in changing the charging section from ... challenged the addition made by the A.O. towards opening capital under Section 68 of the Act, as unexplained cash credit in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search and claimed that, the additions made by the A.O. cannot be sustained. The assessee had also contested

Bhupal Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle -1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 282/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition made by the A.O. which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of an amount of Rs.13,02,340/- 4. Any other grounds ... circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellant Commissioner erred in confirming the additions made by the A.O which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the disallowance of site expenses amounting to Rs.90,00,000/- 4. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming

Bhupal Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 281/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition made by the A.O. which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of an amount of Rs.13,02,340/- 4. Any other grounds ... circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellant Commissioner erred in confirming the additions made by the A.O which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the disallowance of site expenses amounting to Rs.90,00,000/- 4. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming

Bhupal Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 280/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the addition made by the A.O. which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of an amount of Rs.13,02,340/- 4. Any other grounds ... circumstances of the case. 2. The Appellant Commissioner erred in confirming the additions made by the A.O which is not based on any incriminating material. 3. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming the disallowance of site expenses amounting to Rs.90,00,000/- 4. The Appellate Commissioner erred in confirming

Ponnapula Sulochana, L/R of Late Ponnapula Sanjeeva Parthasarathy, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle -3(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 295/HYD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

ought to have appreciated the fact that the Ld.AO has erred in not restricting himself to the income originally assessed/returned as there is no incriminating material found during the course of search relating to this AY. 3.The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that in a search assessment ... addition can be made to the concluded assessments without there being any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the Ld. AO has erred in passing

Ponapula Sulochana Lr Late P Sanjeeva Parthasarathy, Hyderabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee for A

ITA 294/HYD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)(a)Section 153DSection 80

ought to have appreciated the fact that the Ld.AO has erred in not restricting himself to the income originally assessed/returned as there is no incriminating material found during the course of search relating to this AY. 3.The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that in a search assessment ... addition can be made to the concluded assessments without there being any incriminating material found during the course of search proceedings. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the Ld. AO has erred in passing

M/S. Bannariamman Educational Trust, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, CC-3(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1379/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263

scenario, the settled position of Law is that the AO while framing assessment u/s.153C of the Act can only make addition based on incriminating material unearthed from search in the 3rd party premises; and for taking such a view, we rely on the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision ... case of CIT v. Singhad Technical Education Society (397 ITR 344)(SC). Hence, in the absence of incriminating material unearthed from the premises of searched party i.e. Chettinad Builders, no addition/disallowance could have been made by the AO while framing the assessment u/s.153C