← 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

Gulshan Homes and Infrastructure (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. Dr. Manoj Kumar, DCIT, Central Circle-31, New Delhi

ITA 1595/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Bindal, CA
Section 153C

153C of the Act, in clear violation of the law, though there was no incriminating material at all gathered for any of the assessment years much less for the AY 2020-21, demonstrating complete lack of application of mind by the respective AOs to initiate proceedings u/s 153C ... clear incorrect appreciation, deserves to be reversed. 9. The CIT(A) erred in law and on fact in not appreciating that though no incriminating material was found even in respect of Mr Gulshan who admittedly is a separate assessee than the assessee-company, yet no satisfaction notes u/s 153C

Sadhvi Exim Limited, Lucknow vs. Dy Commissioner New Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 6109/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 6068/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 6109/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Sadhvi Exim Ltd., Vs Dcit, 6/249, Vipul Khand, Gomti Nagar, Central Circle-29, Uttar Pradesh-226010 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aavcs1889F Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Twin Appeals In Ita Nos. 6068 & 6109/Del/2025 For Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19, Arise Against The Cit(A)-25, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2024-25/1069978542(1) & 1069978542(1) Dated 28.10.2024, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

involving varying sums, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion. It is in this factual backdrop that we sought to know about the corresponding incriminating material found or seized against the assessee during the course of search herein dated 13.04.2017. 4. Learned CIT-DR takes us to both the impugned ... recorded his statement that he had around 100 companies including the assessee which provided accommodation entries. He could hardly dispute that no such specific incriminating material found/seized during the course of search herein has been quoted by both the learned lower authorities so as to add the impugned alleged accommodation

Sadhvi Exim Limited, Lucknow vs. Dy. Commissioner, New Delhi

ITA 6068/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwalita No. 6068/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Ita No. 6109/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Sadhvi Exim Ltd., Vs Dcit, 6/249, Vipul Khand, Gomti Nagar, Central Circle-29, Uttar Pradesh-226010 New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aavcs1889F Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Twin Appeals In Ita Nos. 6068 & 6109/Del/2025 For Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19, Arise Against The Cit(A)-25, New Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/M/250/2024-25/1069978542(1) & 1069978542(1) Dated 28.10.2024, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

involving varying sums, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion. It is in this factual backdrop that we sought to know about the corresponding incriminating material found or seized against the assessee during the course of search herein dated 13.04.2017. 4. Learned CIT-DR takes us to both the impugned ... recorded his statement that he had around 100 companies including the assessee which provided accommodation entries. He could hardly dispute that no such specific incriminating material found/seized during the course of search herein has been quoted by both the learned lower authorities so as to add the impugned alleged accommodation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Noida vs. Saraswati Ammal Education and Charitable Trust, Chennai

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2291/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

sustaining additions based on statement of a third person, viz. Shri VM, recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, which could not constitute incriminating material in the case of the appellant Trust. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income ... documents were seized from the custody of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan written in his Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Noida vs. Saraswati Ammal Education and Charitable Trust, Chennai

ITA 2290/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

sustaining additions based on statement of a third person, viz. Shri VM, recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, which could not constitute incriminating material in the case of the appellant Trust. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income ... transaction. Apart from the same, those dumb documents were seized from the custody of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan written in his hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. Saraswati Ammal Education and Charitable Trust, Chennai

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2289/DEL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

sustaining additions based on statement of a third person, viz. Shri VM, recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, which could not constitute incriminating material in the case of the appellant Trust. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income ... documents were seized from the custody of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan written in his Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. Saraswati Ammal Education and Charitable Trust, Chennai

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2288/DEL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

sustaining additions based on statement of a third person, viz. Shri VM, recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, which could not constitute incriminating material in the case of the appellant Trust. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income ... documents were seized from the custody of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan written in his Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged

Saraswathi Ammal Educational and Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. ACIT Centre Circle II, Noida

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2182/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

sustaining additions based on statement of a third person, viz. Shri VM, recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, which could not constitute incriminating material in the case of the appellant Trust. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income ... custody of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan written in his 12 ITA No. 2181/Del/2023 & ors Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged

Saraswathi Ammal Educational and Charitable Trust, Chennai vs. ACIT Centre Circle II, Noida

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2181/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 133ASection 142Section 144Section 153Section 153CSection 69ASection 69C

sustaining additions based on statement of a third person, viz. Shri VM, recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, which could not constitute incriminating material in the case of the appellant Trust. 10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income ... documents were seized from the custody of Sh. V. Mathiyalgan written in his Saraswati Ammal Educational & Charitable Trust Vs. ACIT hand writing and no incriminating material whatsoever were found at the premises of the Assessee in the survey conducted by the Department corroborating to the allegation that such receipts belonged

Anjana Construction, Nimbahera vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 455/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Anjana Construction, Nimbahera vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 453/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur vs. Anjana Construction, Chittorgarh

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 313/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Shailesh Maganlal Ramani, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1(2)(5), Rajkot

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

ITA 321/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.321/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shailesh Maganlal Ramani The Ito, Ward-1(2)(5), बनाम Star Shopping Centre 20 Rajkot New Jagnath, Jugatram, Vs. Raval Marg, Rajkot-360001 Pan : Abupr7272G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri R. D. Lalchandani & Ms. Monica Patva, Ld. Ars. राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29/09/2025 Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Dated 21-03-2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’], In The Matter Of Assessment Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As “The Act”) For The Asst. Year 2012-13. Shailesh Maganlal Ramani

For Appellant: Shri R. D. Lalchandani &For Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Sr-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 282ASection 282A(1)

tune of Rs.84,04,625/-, based on the search conducted in JP Iskon Group. The ld.Counsel stated that the documents were not the incriminating material, so far, the assessee is concerned. The learned Counsel further submitted that based on the same facts and circumstances, as that of the assessee

Chunilal Mahadevbhai Sanja, Morbi vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 279/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 279/Rjt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Chunilal Mahadevbhai Sanja, Vs. The Pcit-1 C/O M/S. Nobel Cera Coat, Rajkot At-Jambudia, Morbi-363642 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acnpp7711N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 263

reply, the assessee has submitted that the Faceless assessing officer passed the assessment order accepting the returned income as he did not have any incriminating material on his records. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer did not make any efforts to find out correctness of the information from ... entered into any transaction with Vasant kumar Thakar. Further, the assessee also requested the FAO to provide him with a copy of the relevant incriminating material and a copy of the statement of said Shri Vasant kumar Keshavlal Thakar. The assessee also requested for a cross-examination

Chander Mohan Bhati, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur

58. In view of the above discussion, reasons and findings, this appeal

ITA 732/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Rajnikant Bhatra,CAFor Respondent: Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT
Section 153ASection 24Section 250Section 271(1)

challenge as regards the first addition of Rs.37,13,331/-, Learned CIT(A) observed in the impugned order that the addition was based upon incriminating material found as well as the admission made by the assessee in the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act. Undisclosed Profit ... Department on the members of Shri Chandra Mohan Bhati and Shri Kishan Singh Group, Jaipur. Said action led to recovery of incriminating material including documents, books of account and loose papers from the premises of members of the above said group. The assessee-appellant herein happens

Sh. Nasruddin, Kota vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kota

Appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by

ITA 716/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 153Section 153C

said contention and rather dismissed the appeal, while sustaining the addition. Further, it has been contended that this is a case, where some incriminating material is stated to have been seized from the other, but neither copies of the incriminating material were supplied to the assessee, nor assessment proceedings were ... furnished above said reply to the show cause notice dated 14.02.2023, the Assessing Officer took steps to provide to the assessee copy of the incriminating material, regarding payment “on money” by the assessee. *In Shyam Sunder Khandelwal and others v. ACIT, decided on 19.3.2024, our own Hon’ble High Court

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S Trishul Developers, Bangalore

ITA 766/BANG/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 292Section 69C

modified and additional substantial questions of law) c) Whether the assessment u/s 153A of the Act is invalid in law as neither any incriminating material was found during the course of search nor any addition was made on the basis of materials seized in the course of search

Ramamurthy Praveen Chandra, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 622/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

properly 5. appreciate that the addition made in the impugned order of assessment passed by the learned assessing officer is not based on any incriminating material and further failed to appreciate that for making additions under the proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Act moreso when the proceedings ... properly 17. appreciate that the addition made in the impugned order of assessment passed by the learned assessing officer is not based on any incriminating material and further failed to appreciate that for making additions under the proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Actmoreso when the proceedings are unabated

Ramamurthy Praveen Chandra, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 621/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

properly 5. appreciate that the addition made in the impugned order of assessment passed by the learned assessing officer is not based on any incriminating material and further failed to appreciate that for making additions under the proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Act moreso when the proceedings ... properly 17. appreciate that the addition made in the impugned order of assessment passed by the learned assessing officer is not based on any incriminating material and further failed to appreciate that for making additions under the proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Actmoreso when the proceedings are unabated

Ramamurthy Praveen Chandra, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

In the result, we have allowed grounds raised by the assessee as per above terms for all the years

ITA 620/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh D, Add. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 132Section 143Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

properly 5. appreciate that the addition made in the impugned order of assessment passed by the learned assessing officer is not based on any incriminating material and further failed to appreciate that for making additions under the proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Act moreso when the proceedings ... properly 17. appreciate that the addition made in the impugned order of assessment passed by the learned assessing officer is not based on any incriminating material and further failed to appreciate that for making additions under the proceedings initiated under section 153C of the Actmoreso when the proceedings are unabated