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

Shruti Vinimay Limited, Nagpur vs. DCIT, Central Circle 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 223/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.223/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shruti Vinimay Private बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-4(3) Limited Room No.1921, 19Th Vs. 502, Mahalaxmi Apartment Floor, Air India Building, Shivaji Nagar, Nagpur Nariman Point, Mumbai- (Urban) Nagpur-440010, 400021. Maharashtra, India. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajcs4629R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By: Shri Ganesh Shah (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/09/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax-52 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)], Mumbai Dated 15.12.2022 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee, After A Preliminary Hearing Has Not Pressed Ground No. 1 & 2 Raised In The Revised/Additional Ground Of Appeal Filed Before Us Viz Action Of The Transfer Of The Case From Kolkata To Mumbai U/S 127 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act) As Well As The Action Of Ao First Of All, Dropping The Proceedings Initiated U/S 153C Of The Act & Instead Resorting To The Impugned Re-Opening Of Assessment, Which According To Assessee Is Bad In Law. Since The Aforesaid Two (2) Grounds Have Not Been Pressed By The Ld. Ar Both Grounds Stands Dismissed. 3. Coming To The Next Ground Of Appeal Of The Assessee, Which Is Against The Action Of The Ao To Have Reopened The Assessment U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuance Of Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Which According To The Assessee Is Bad In Law. Since It Is A Legal Issue The Same Is Dealt With.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Shah (Sr. AR)
Section 127Section 147Section 148Section 153C