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

Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1064/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1062/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, ITA Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 are partly allowed and ITA No

ITA 1061/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiita Nos.1061 To 1066/Bang/2023 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Sri Prakash Bhajandas Talreja No.402, 4Th Floor, Embassy Centre No.11, Crescent Road Dcit Bengaluru 560 001 Vs. Central Circle-1(3) Karnataka Bengaluru Pan No : Abkpt1011B Assessee Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent By : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.03.2024 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: The Appeals In Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 Are Emanated From The Common Order Of Cit(A) Central Circle, Bengaluru For The Assessment Years 2014-15 To 2018-19 Dated 16.11.2023. Ita No.1064/Bang/2023 Is Emanated From The Order Of Cit(A) Dated 11.8.2023 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 With Regard To Levy Of Penalty U/S 271Aab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). Since The Issue In All These Appeals Is Common In Nature, These Are Clubbed Together, Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. First, We Will Take Up Ita Nos.1061, 1062, 1063, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2023 For Adjudication. The Common Ground In All These Appeals Except Change In Figures, Which Reads As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R
Section 153CSection 271ASection 69

Anand Kumar Sharma, Howrah vs. DCIT, C.C-2(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 172/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Blei.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Deputy Commissioner Of Income 50/21, Shree Arvind Road Vs Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Kolkata Salkia Howrah - 711106 [Pan: Avmps0367F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, Fca Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench : The Above Captioned Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dt. 24/08/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- It(Ss)A No. 169/Kol/2023; Assessment Year 2010-11:- “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao By Estimating The Commission Income Earned By The Assessee At The Rate Of 0.60% On The Accommodation Entry Amounting To Rs.42.2 Crore Provided By Him & Thereby Making Addition Of Rs.25,32,000/- As Against The 2 I.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023; Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Commission Income Of Rs.6,33,000/- At The Rate Of 0.15% Offered By The Assessee. The Addition Amounting To Rs.18,99,000/- Is, Therefore, Unjustified & Needs To Be Deleted. 2. The Assessee Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Anand Kumar Sharma, Howrah vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 171/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Blei.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Deputy Commissioner Of Income 50/21, Shree Arvind Road Vs Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Kolkata Salkia Howrah - 711106 [Pan: Avmps0367F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, Fca Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench : The Above Captioned Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dt. 24/08/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- It(Ss)A No. 169/Kol/2023; Assessment Year 2010-11:- “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao By Estimating The Commission Income Earned By The Assessee At The Rate Of 0.60% On The Accommodation Entry Amounting To Rs.42.2 Crore Provided By Him & Thereby Making Addition Of Rs.25,32,000/- As Against The 2 I.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023; Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Commission Income Of Rs.6,33,000/- At The Rate Of 0.15% Offered By The Assessee. The Addition Amounting To Rs.18,99,000/- Is, Therefore, Unjustified & Needs To Be Deleted. 2. The Assessee Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Anand Kumar Sharma, Howrah vs. DCIT.CC-2(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 170/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Blei.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Deputy Commissioner Of Income 50/21, Shree Arvind Road Vs Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Kolkata Salkia Howrah - 711106 [Pan: Avmps0367F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, Fca Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench : The Above Captioned Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dt. 24/08/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- It(Ss)A No. 169/Kol/2023; Assessment Year 2010-11:- “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao By Estimating The Commission Income Earned By The Assessee At The Rate Of 0.60% On The Accommodation Entry Amounting To Rs.42.2 Crore Provided By Him & Thereby Making Addition Of Rs.25,32,000/- As Against The 2 I.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023; Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Commission Income Of Rs.6,33,000/- At The Rate Of 0.15% Offered By The Assessee. The Addition Amounting To Rs.18,99,000/- Is, Therefore, Unjustified & Needs To Be Deleted. 2. The Assessee Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 250Section 69

Anand Kumar Sharma, Howrah vs. DCIT, CC-2(1), Kolkata.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITSSA 169/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Blei.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Deputy Commissioner Of Income 50/21, Shree Arvind Road Vs Tax, Central Circle – 2(1), Kolkata Salkia Howrah - 711106 [Pan: Avmps0367F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, Fca Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/01/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 14/03/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench : The Above Captioned Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Even Dt. 24/08/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- It(Ss)A No. 169/Kol/2023; Assessment Year 2010-11:- “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao By Estimating The Commission Income Earned By The Assessee At The Rate Of 0.60% On The Accommodation Entry Amounting To Rs.42.2 Crore Provided By Him & Thereby Making Addition Of Rs.25,32,000/- As Against The 2 I.T(Ss)A. Nos. 169 To 172/Kol/2023; Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2013-14 Anand Kumar Sharma Commission Income Of Rs.6,33,000/- At The Rate Of 0.15% Offered By The Assessee. The Addition Amounting To Rs.18,99,000/- Is, Therefore, Unjustified & Needs To Be Deleted. 2. The Assessee Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Amend Or Withdraw Any Ground Or Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar Pransukha, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 132(4)Section 153CSection 250Section 69