Section 153C of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 153C is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 9,619 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 153C

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.

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. 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.

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.

Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE
281 CTR 241 · 2015 · Supreme Court
1,335
citing judgments

An assessee must be given an opportunity to cross-examine third parties whose statements are relied upon for adverse findings. Failure to provide this opportunity is a serious flaw rendering the order a nullity.

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.

Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT
26 ITR 775 · 1954 · Supreme Court
1,061
citing judgments

Corroborative evidence is essential to support evidence found on third-party premises, and an assessment cannot be based on suspicion, surmises, or conjecture.

K.P. Varghese v. ITO
131 ITR 597 · 1981 · Supreme Court
989
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

Judgments on Section 153C

Palladam Krishnasamy Ganeshwar, Tirupur vs. DCIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1222/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1222/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1223/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1224/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1225/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Palladam Krishnasamy Ganeshwar Dcit बनाम/ 21,Shri Ganesa Textiles, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-3 Vs. Palladam, Tirupur-641 664. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adfpg-6476-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

M/S. Anoop Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd., Siliguri vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 4(3), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITSSA 102/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.(Ss)A. No.102/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Anoop Tea Co. Private Limited .………. Appellant C/O, M/S. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co. 7, C. R. Avenue, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700072. (Pan: Aacca1872F) Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata ………. Respondent Appearances By: Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant Shri Prakash Nath Barnwal, Cit, Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent Date Of Concluding The Hearing :October 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order :November 18, 2024 आदेश / Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.06.2024 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-27 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”) For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14. 2. At The Outset, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Invited Our Attention To The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Which Is An Ex Parte Order. A Separate Affidavit Has Been Filed Explaining The Reasons For Non-Compliance Before The Ld. Cit(A), Wherein, It Has Been Mentioned That The Concerned Dealing Staff Who Was Looking After The Said Taxation Matter Of The Company Was Not Keeping Well & Had Left The Services. The New Incumbent Joined In April, 2024 And, Therefore, The Notices

Section 153CSection 250

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Natarajan Sathishkumar, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 198/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Natarajan Saravanakumar, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 197/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Gurusamy Dhanasekaran, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 196/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

Kamal Sharma, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-II, Faridabad

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

ITA 1218/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekkamal Sharma, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle Ii, Village Bakoli, Faridabad. Delhi – 415 112. (Pan : Awsps7332M) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate Shri Aman Garg, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.09.2024 Date Of Order : 14.11.2024 Order Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals-3, Gurgaon (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 27.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Submitted That Search Was Conducted In The Case Of Sunstar Group On 19.12.2013. Based On The Material Found, Notice Under Section 153C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) Was Issued On 20.01.2016. He Submitted That The 2 Deemed Search For The Purpose Of Section 153C Is Ay 2016-17. Assessing Officer Has Issued Notice U/S 153C To Ays Falling Within Six Assessment Years Immediately Preceding Assessment Year Relevant To The Previous Year In Which Search Was Conducted. He Submitted That Notices U/S 153C Was Issued On 20.01.2016 To The Assessee. It Shows That Satisfaction Was Recorded By The Assessing Officer Of The Assessee In The Ay 2016-17, Therefore, As Per The Provisions Of Section 153C, Six Years Prior To The Searched Assessment Year In This Case Is Ay 2016-17 Covers The Period I.E. Ays 2010-11 To 2015-16. Since The Assessment Proceedings Were Initiated For Impugned Ay 2009-10 Is Beyond Jurisdiction. He Submitted That The Issue Under Consideration Is Well Settled & In This Regard, He Relied On The Following Decisions :- (I) Itta Delhi In The Case Of M/S. Marconi Infratech (P) Ltd. Vs. Acit, Cc-11, Faridabad – 2024 (7) Timi 129 Dated 21.06.2024; (Ii)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT DR
Section 153C