Section 153A of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 153A is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 18,957 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 153A

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

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.

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory
359 ITR 565 · 2013 · High Court
2,590
citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether the penalty proceedings are initiated for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. This non-specification vitiates the penalty proceedings.

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.

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT
193 ITR 321 · 1992 · Supreme Court
1,695
citing judgments

The principle of consistency applies in tax matters, meaning a fundamental aspect found to be true in one assessment year should not be changed in a subsequent year if the order was not challenged.

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.

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT
187 ITR 688 · 1991 · Supreme Court
1,372
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) possesses co-terminus powers with the Assessing Officer and can direct the Assessing Officer to perform actions he failed to do, but cannot introduce a new source of income in the assessment. The appellate assessment must be confined to the items of income that were the subject matter of the original assessment.

Judgments on Section 153A

M/S. Jai Salasar Balaji Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-Xiii, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2142/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 2142/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Jai Salasar Balaji Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- D.C.I.T., Central Circle-Xiii, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6970 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, Fca For The Respondent : Shri Bani Brata Dutta, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.09.2014 Of C.I.T.(A)-Central-Ii, Kolkata Relating To A.Y.2009-10. 2. In This Appeal The Assessee Has Challenged The Order Of Cit(A) Whereby The Cit(A) Confirmed The Order Of Ap Imposing Penalty On The Assessee U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax 1961 (Act). 3. The Facts & Circumstances Under The Penalty Was Imposed On The Assessee By The Ao Are As Follows :- There Was A Search & Seizure Operation Conducted By The Revenue U/S 132 Of The Act In Jai Balaji Group. The Assessee Was Also A Part Of The Jai Balaji Group & The Assessee’S Business Premises Was Also Search By The Revenue On 09.06.2011. In The Course Of Search The Assessee Made Disclosure Of Rs.46 Lakhs In The Statement Of The Director Recorded U/S 132(4) Of The Act. The Director Of The Assessee Made A Disclosure Of Rs.46 Lakhs As Undisclosed Income & Agreed To Disclose The Said Sum In The Return Of Income To Be Filed For A.Y.2009-10.The Break-Up Of The Disclosure Of Undisclosed Income Can Be Summed Up In The Form Of The Following Chart :-

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Bani Brata Dutta, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 5A