“block assessment”

Search & SeizureSection 158BCSection 158BC4,282 judgments

The decision most relied on for block assessment is CIT v. RRJ Securities Ltd. (380 ITR 612), cited in 689 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on block assessment

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.

SSP Aviation Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

346 ITR 177 · 2012 · High Court

308

citing judgments

For a non-searched person under Section 153C, the relevant six assessment years are counted backward from the assessment year in which the search was conducted, as prescribed by the first proviso to Section 153C(1).

PCIT v. Ojjus Medicare (P) Ltd.

465 ITR 101 · 2024 · High Court

277

citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, the commencement point for calculating the six or ten assessment year block period is the date of issuing the Section 153C notice, or the date of the satisfaction note/handing over of books, as clarified by the first proviso to Section 153C(1).

Manish Maheshwari v. ACIT

289 ITR 341 · 2007 · Supreme Court

237

citing judgments

A block assessment under Chapter XIV-B of the Income-tax Act requires a prior search conducted under Section 132 or a requisition of documents/assets under Section 132A. This fundamental condition precedent applies to block assessments, including those concerning other persons under Section 158BD.

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.

Rishabchand Bhansali v. Dy. CIT

267 ITR 577 · 2004 · High Court

202

citing judgments

The previous approval required for assessment orders under provisions like Section 158BG or Section 153D is an administrative power and an internal matter, not deciding the assessee's rights. A mere irregularity in granting such administrative approval does not vitiate the assessment order.

P.R. Metrani v. CIT

287 ITR 209 · 2006 · Supreme Court

187

citing judgments

Section 132 of the Income Tax Act is a self-contained code governing search and seizure operations. The books of accounts, documents, valuables, or statements recorded during a search can be used as evidence in any subsequent proceedings under the Act, and the section outlines the conditions for issuing warrants of authorization.

CIT (Central) v. Kabul Chawla

2015 SCC OnLine DEL 11555 · 2015 · Reported

186

citing judgments

No addition can be made in respect of a completed assessment in the absence of incriminating material, especially when considering the object and purpose of Section 153-A.

Judgments citing block assessment

Smt. Jyoti Agarwal, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA nos

ITA 1373/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Mar 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 271A

mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that 22 ITA Nos. 1373(4)-18/JP/2018 Smt. Jyoti Agrawal, Kota. the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory ... mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable cause, the penalty

Shri Manoj Moondhra, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 857/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)(b)Section 154Section 271Section 271A

mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is Shri Manoj Moondhra vs. DCIT not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable ... mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable cause, the penalty

Late Ram Kishan Mall, L/H Shri Man Mohan Mall, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 62(4), Kolkata

ITA 701/KOL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2004-05

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 158Section 292B

Supreme Court judgment in Hotel Blue Moon has first to be referred to since such judgment still holds the field. In course of a block assessment when the Assessing Officer repudiated the return filed by the assessee but failed to issue any notice under Section ... made at variance with the return filed by the assessee. It is also evident that the issue is not limited to block assessment but would apply to every case where a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act is necessary. In the judgment and order of the Appellate Tribunal

Shri Mukesh Moondhra, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 226/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)

Section 154Section 271ASection 274

mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable cause, the penalty ... mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable cause, the penalty

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Smt. Malti Agarwal, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1447/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta(CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

reference to any other material discovered during search and seizure operations 15 DCIT Vs Malti Agarwal would not empower the AO to make a block assessment merely because any admission was made by the Assessee during search operation. 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates ... once clear that a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be used in evidence for making a block assessment only if the said statement is made in the context of other evidence or material discovered during the search. A statement of a person, which

Shri Manoj Moondhra, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT)

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153(1)(b)Section 154Section 271Section 271A

mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is Shri Manoj Moondhra vs. DCIT not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable ... mandatory but discretionary. The provisions of section 271AAB of the Act is parimateria with that of section 158BFA of the Act relating to block assessment and accordingly argued that the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is not mandatory but discretionary. When there is reasonable cause, the penalty

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Smt. Indira Agrawal, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1444/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta(CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

standalone basis without reference to any other material discovered during search and seizure operations would not empower the AO to make a block assessment merely because any admission was made by the Assessee during search operation. 15 DCIT Vs Indira Agarwal 21. A plain reading of Section ... once clear that a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be used in evidence for making a block assessment only if the said statement is made in the context of other evidence or material discovered during the search. A statement of a person, which

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota vs. Shri Ajay Agarwal, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1442/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta(CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

standalone basis without reference to any other material discovered during search and seizure operations would not empower the AO to make a block assessment merely because any admission was made by the Assessee during search operation. 21. A plain reading of Section 132 (4) of the Act indicates that ... once clear that a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be used in evidence for making a block assessment only if the said statement is made in the context of other evidence or material discovered during the search. A statement of a person, which

Dy. C.I.T. - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Dipti Dattaraj Salgaonkar, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7403/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

case of M.P. Ramachandran Vs. DCIT (supra) a similar issue was decided in favour of the assessee as under:- “The AO, during the block assessment proceedings, formed his opinion that addition of Rs.527.85 lakhs was warranted as undisclosed income in the block assessment and he actually made such addition. When ... came to the conclusion, on the strength of the assessee's view that the disallowance of advertisement expenditure was not called for in the block assessment proceedings. The Departmental Representative has fairly conceded that the Tribunal deleted the said addition from the block assessment and the Department has carried

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Lalit Mahajan, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the cross-objections of the assessees are allowed

ITA 5590/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2019AY 2006-07