← All Phrases

“seized material”

Search & SeizureSection 153ASection 153A12,214 judgments

The decision most relied on for seized material is Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. (149 Taxmann.com 399), cited in 2,379 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on seized material

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

No income can be quantified or disallowance made under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act unless it is justified on the basis of material seized during the course of the search.

CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears
362 ITR 673 · 2014 · Supreme Court
528
citing judgments

For initiating proceedings under Section 153C, the Assessing Officer of the searched person must record a satisfaction that seized material pertains to a third party, and the Assessing Officer of that third party must also record satisfaction that the material has a nexus to undisclosed income.

ACIT v. Serajuddin & Co.
163 Taxmann.com 118 · 2024 · Supreme Court
500
citing judgments

Strict adherence to approval protocols under Section 153D, including those in the Departmental Manual of Office Procedure, is essential for search assessments. An assessment is invalid if the approving authority fails to apply its mind or consider all relevant seized material before granting approval.

CIT v. Murli Agro Products Ltd.
49 Taxmann.com 172 · 2014 · High Court
331
citing judgments

In assessments under Section 153A, additions for unabated assessment years are permissible only if based on seized or incriminating material discovered during the search.

ARN Infrastructure India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT
394 ITR 569 · 2017 · High Court
282
citing judgments

For initiating proceedings under Section 153C, seized documents must be incriminating and specifically relate to the assessment years for which assessments are reopened. A document relevant only for one year cannot be used to reopen other assessment years without being incriminating for those years.

CIT v. Ashwani Gupta
322 ITR 396 · 2010 · High Court
262
citing judgments

Proceedings become fatal if principles of natural justice are violated, such as when seized material is not provided to the assessee or cross-examination of a person whose statement the Assessing Officer relies upon is denied.

CIT v. Jasjit Singh
155 Taxmann.com 155 · 2023 · Supreme Court
235
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C concerning a non-searched person, the relevant date for calculating the block of assessment years is the date on which the jurisdictional Assessing Officer of that person assumes possession of the seized material, not the date of the original search. This date determines the look-back period for reopening assessments under Section 153A read with 153C.

Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer
161 Taxmann.com 485 · 2024 · High Court
196
citing judgments

Recording satisfaction under Section 153C for initiating proceedings against a third person is not a mechanical exercise; it requires a finding that seized material has a direct bearing on the third person's income, and improper satisfaction vitiates the assessment. Abatement under the second proviso to Section 153A is an inevitable consequence of a search, irrespective of the Assessing Officer's opinion on the material's impact.

Judgments citing seized material

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai vs. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt Ltd, Chennai

ITA 1163/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate : 08.10.2025 : 21.11.2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

which several material viz., books of accounts, documents & electronic data, loose sheets, note books etc. was found and seized. According to the Revenue, the seized material inter alia contained details of suppression of income by the assessee by debiting bogus purchases from vendors of old liquor bottles and transportation & logistics ... virtue of the provisions of Section 153A and 153C of the Act. In the decided case, the search was conducted on 11.10.2023 and the seized material / information relating to the assessee was handed over on 16.08.2024. Having regard to the provisions of Section 153C of the Act, the deemed date

Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle 05, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1637/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

appellant's assessment stands completed/unabated. 3. That in any case, unreported commission of the group of companies to which the appellant belongs and the seized materials, having been surrendered to tax and adjudicated upon by the Hon'ble ITSC in the case of the group's flagship company, no presumption ... unreported commission in the hands of the appellant is sustainable in the absence of any seized material specific to the appellant and/or found not submitted to the ITSC. 4. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 05, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1636/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

appellant's assessment stands completed/unabated. 3. That in any case, unreported commission of the group of companies to which the appellant belongs and the seized materials, having been surrendered to tax and adjudicated upon by the Hon'ble ITSC in the case of the group's flagship company, no presumption ... unreported commission in the hands of the appellant is sustainable in the absence of any seized material specific to the appellant and/or found not submitted to the ITSC. 4. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

Snw Smith Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1635/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

appellant's assessment stands completed/unabated. 3. That in any case, unreported commission of the group of companies to which the appellant belongs and the seized materials, having been surrendered to tax and adjudicated upon by the Hon'ble ITSC in the case of the group's flagship company, no presumption ... unreported commission in the hands of the appellant is sustainable in the absence of any seized material specific to the appellant and/or found not submitted to the ITSC. 4. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

Snw Smith Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1634/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

appellant's assessment stands completed/unabated. 3. That in any case, unreported commission of the group of companies to which the appellant belongs and the seized materials, having been surrendered to tax and adjudicated upon by the Hon'ble ITSC in the case of the group's flagship company, no presumption ... unreported commission in the hands of the appellant is sustainable in the absence of any seized material specific to the appellant and/or found not submitted to the ITSC. 4. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

Snw Smith Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle 5, Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeals pertaining to Assessment Years

ITA 1633/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Hasneeta Matta, Adv, &For Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 153A

appellant's assessment stands completed/unabated. 3. That in any case, unreported commission of the group of companies to which the appellant belongs and the seized materials, having been surrendered to tax and adjudicated upon by the Hon'ble ITSC in the case of the group's flagship company, no presumption ... unreported commission in the hands of the appellant is sustainable in the absence of any seized material specific to the appellant and/or found not submitted to the ITSC. 4. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Tara Chand Goel, Jaipur

ITA 1353/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, C.A. (through V.c.)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

statements recorded during proceedings. Further, as per the order of the Hon'ble High Court, Rajasthan, applicability of Section 153C in cases where the seized material related to or belonged to person other than on whom search is conducted or requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose. Section ... basis of information of advancing of unaccounted cash loans by the appellant through the broker Sh. Ramesh Chand Maheshwari and on the basis of seized material during the course of search proceedings in the Ramesh Manihar Group. 5.2.10 In the light of the above decision, as the facts

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. Ramasamy Rajasehar, Perambalur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3336/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Shiva Srinivas, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 69

Company Private Limited and M/s.Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Builders Private Limited were found and seized from the assessee’s residence. 6. On the basis of the seized materials, the AO recorded the satisfaction as contemplated u/s.153C of the Act and consequently issued notice under the said provision on 27.08.2019. In response ... observed that these loose sheets contained details of investments recorded against the name of the assessee in the aforementioned entities. Based on such seized materials, the AO tabulated the alleged investments as under: :-5-: I.T.A. No.:3336 /Chny/2024 & C.O.No.29/Chny/2025 S. No Seized material Name of the entity Amount

Income Tax Officer 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Micro Plantae Limited, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2925/MUM/2025[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Smt.Renu Jauhri7 (A.Y.2004-05)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah, CA a/w MsFor Respondent: Shri R. A. Dhyani (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

Specifically, in the case of Saksham Commodities (supra) it has been held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that the seized material must pertain to the relevant assessment year and notices issued to third person in the absence of incriminating material is unsustainable. The SLP filed by the revenue

Bona Terra Greenhouses LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2115/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

Lancy Constructions and held that the said cases talks about “incriminating evidence” or “incriminating material” found during the search action and not merely “seized material” or “seized documents”. 10. We have again given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly the additions made and affirmed

Bona Terra Greenhouses LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2114/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

Lancy Constructions and held that the said cases talks about “incriminating evidence” or “incriminating material” found during the search action and not merely “seized material” or “seized documents”. 10. We have again given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly the additions made and affirmed

Bona Terra Greenhouses LLP, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 2089/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. Singh, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 143(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

Lancy Constructions and held that the said cases talks about “incriminating evidence” or “incriminating material” found during the search action and not merely “seized material” or “seized documents”. 10. We have again given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly the additions made and affirmed

Chandra Vidya Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -28, Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 4023/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously, an material." (v) In the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment ... evidence found in the course of a search and those assessments not being liable to be arbitrarily reopened or examined afresh unless the seized material be found to have some nexus with the assessment of total income for that year. The Court in Kabul Chawla further held that completed assessments

Chandra Vidya Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -28, Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 4022/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously, an material." (v) In the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment ... evidence found in the course of a search and those assessments not being liable to be arbitrarily reopened or examined afresh unless the seized material be found to have some nexus with the assessment of total income for that year. The Court in Kabul Chawla further held that completed assessments

Chandra Vidya Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -28, Delhi, New Delhi

ITA 4021/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountnat Member

Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

related to the evidence found, it does not mean that the assessment "can be arbitrary or made without any relevance or nexus with the seized material. Obviously, an material." (v) In the absence of any incriminating material, the completed assessment can be reiterated and the abated assessment or reassessment ... evidence found in the course of a search and those assessments not being liable to be arbitrarily reopened or examined afresh unless the seized material be found to have some nexus with the assessment of total income for that year. The Court in Kabul Chawla further held that completed assessments

Deputy Commissione Rof Income Tax, Delhi vs. Sulochana Mahadev Bobade, Pune

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1762/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 153CSection 68Section 69A

holding that the satisfaction note does not have any reference of the said search while the same clearly establishes a nexus between the seized material and the undisclosed income of the assessee for the current AY. 4. That the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by deleting ... this factual backdrop that our attention is invited to page 2 of the assessment order dated 23rd February, 2022 that the relevant seized material did not relate to the assessee Mrs. Sulochana Mahadev Bobade but to her eponymous “HUF” only. The Revenue is indeed very fair in not being able

Hillview Technologies Private Limited, Laxmi Nagar Delhi vs. DCIT, Noida Uttar Pradesh

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3326/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

Section 132Section 153CSection 68

Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred not allowing addition of Rs. 9257404/- when the same is not out of seized material since assessment order is u/s 153C/144. The seized material talks about investment in Arnica Financial Consultants (P) Ltd never talks about investment. The source of investment is proved ... Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)' erred not allowing addition of Rs. 157404/- when the same is not out of seized material. This is an adhoc addition and assessment is under section 153C/144 ITA No.- 3326/Del/2024 Hillview Technologies Pvt. Ltd. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Mohammed Kutty Pudukkudi, Kozhikode vs. ACIT Central Circle 2, Kozhikode

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 732/COCH/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mohammed Kutty Pudukkudi .......... Appellant 4/61, Pudukkudi House, Ponmundam P.O. Tirur, Malappuram 676106 [Pan: Afepp4646J] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Kozhikode ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri C.B.M. Warrier, Ca Revenue By: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri C.B.M. Warrier, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153A

total income of Rs. 58,46,340/-. While doing so, the AO made addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- based on the seized material CHN/IT/023/15- 16/RR/A3-Page 12-17 and CHN/IT/023/15-16/RR/A3-Page 24-26. According to the AO the seized material reflects payments of Rs. 40,00,000/- in cash ... material found and seized during the course of 132 operations in the case of the appellant. It is undisputed fact that the seized material indicated the receipts of Rs. 40,00,000/- and Rs. 10,00,000/- respectively in cash. The appellant had filed explanation in support of the above

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle, Jaipur vs. Mukesh Kapoor, Jaipur

ITA 319/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dangayach, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anital Rinesh, JCIT (through V.C.)
Section 147Section 148Section 153C

statements recorded during proceedings. Further, as per the order of the Hon'ble High Court, Rajasthan, applicability of Section 153C in cases where the seized material Mukesh Kapoor, Jaipur. related to or belonged to person other than on whom search is conducted or requisition made does not render Section ... basis of information of advancing of unaccounted cash loans by the appellant through the broker Sh. Ramesh Chand Maheshwari and on the basis of seized material during the course of search proceedings in the Ramesh Manihar Group. 4.2.10 In the light of the above decision, as the facts

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Mukesh Kapoor, Jaipur

ITA 318/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri A.B. Dangayach, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Anital Rinesh, JCIT (through V.C.)
Section 147Section 148Section 153C

statements recorded during proceedings. Further, as per the order of the Hon'ble High Court, Rajasthan, applicability of Section 153C in cases where the seized material Mukesh Kapoor, Jaipur. related to or belonged to person other than on whom search is conducted or requisition made does not render Section ... basis of information of advancing of unaccounted cash loans by the appellant through the broker Sh. Ramesh Chand Maheshwari and on the basis of seized material during the course of search proceedings in the Ramesh Manihar Group. 4.2.10 In the light of the above decision, as the facts