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

Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. Cen.Cir. 33, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8501/MUM/2011[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं.8498/मुं/2011 िन.व.2006-07) आ.अ.सं.8499/मुं/2011 िन.व.2007-08) आ.अ.सं.8500/मुं/2011 िन.व.2008-09) आ.अ.सं.8501/मुं/2011 िन.व.2009-10) Shri Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, 3-A, Jain Hind Building, 4Th Floor, Block No.2, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Aexpr5866G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit, Cc-33, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. Sanghvi "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Anchal Sharma, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] For The आ.अ.सं. 8498 से 8501/मुं/2011 (िन.व. 2006-07 To 2009-10) I.T.A No.8498 To 8501/Mum/2011 (A.Y.2006-07 To 2009-10) Assessment Years (Ay) 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, Respectively. All The Impugned Orders Are Of Even Date I.E. 10.10.2011. Since, The Facts Germane To The Issue Raised In All The Appeals Are Identical & Identical Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, These Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication & Are Decided By This Common Order. 2. Sh. M. B. Sanghvi Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That The Appeal In Ita No. 8498/Mum/2011 For A.Y. 2006-07 May Be Taken As Lead Appeal For Culling Out The Facts. The Facts In The Other Appeals Are Identical.

For Appellant: S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. SanghviFor Respondent: Sh. Anchal Sharma, CIT-DR

Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. Cen.Cir. 33, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8500/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं.8498/मुं/2011 िन.व.2006-07) आ.अ.सं.8499/मुं/2011 िन.व.2007-08) आ.अ.सं.8500/मुं/2011 िन.व.2008-09) आ.अ.सं.8501/मुं/2011 िन.व.2009-10) Shri Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, 3-A, Jain Hind Building, 4Th Floor, Block No.2, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Aexpr5866G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit, Cc-33, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. Sanghvi "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Anchal Sharma, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] For The आ.अ.सं. 8498 से 8501/मुं/2011 (िन.व. 2006-07 To 2009-10) I.T.A No.8498 To 8501/Mum/2011 (A.Y.2006-07 To 2009-10) Assessment Years (Ay) 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, Respectively. All The Impugned Orders Are Of Even Date I.E. 10.10.2011. Since, The Facts Germane To The Issue Raised In All The Appeals Are Identical & Identical Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, These Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication & Are Decided By This Common Order. 2. Sh. M. B. Sanghvi Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That The Appeal In Ita No. 8498/Mum/2011 For A.Y. 2006-07 May Be Taken As Lead Appeal For Culling Out The Facts. The Facts In The Other Appeals Are Identical.

For Appellant: S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. SanghviFor Respondent: Sh. Anchal Sharma, CIT-DR

Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. Cen.Cir. 33, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8499/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं.8498/मुं/2011 िन.व.2006-07) आ.अ.सं.8499/मुं/2011 िन.व.2007-08) आ.अ.सं.8500/मुं/2011 िन.व.2008-09) आ.अ.सं.8501/मुं/2011 िन.व.2009-10) Shri Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, 3-A, Jain Hind Building, 4Th Floor, Block No.2, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Aexpr5866G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit, Cc-33, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. Sanghvi "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Anchal Sharma, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] For The आ.अ.सं. 8498 से 8501/मुं/2011 (िन.व. 2006-07 To 2009-10) I.T.A No.8498 To 8501/Mum/2011 (A.Y.2006-07 To 2009-10) Assessment Years (Ay) 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, Respectively. All The Impugned Orders Are Of Even Date I.E. 10.10.2011. Since, The Facts Germane To The Issue Raised In All The Appeals Are Identical & Identical Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, These Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication & Are Decided By This Common Order. 2. Sh. M. B. Sanghvi Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That The Appeal In Ita No. 8498/Mum/2011 For A.Y. 2006-07 May Be Taken As Lead Appeal For Culling Out The Facts. The Facts In The Other Appeals Are Identical.

For Appellant: S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. SanghviFor Respondent: Sh. Anchal Sharma, CIT-DR

Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. Cen.Cir. 33, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8498/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं.8498/मुं/2011 िन.व.2006-07) आ.अ.सं.8499/मुं/2011 िन.व.2007-08) आ.अ.सं.8500/मुं/2011 िन.व.2008-09) आ.अ.सं.8501/मुं/2011 िन.व.2009-10) Shri Jugraj Pannalal Rathod, 3-A, Jain Hind Building, 4Th Floor, Block No.2, Bhuleshwar, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Aexpr5866G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit, Cc-33, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. Sanghvi "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Anchal Sharma, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] For The आ.अ.सं. 8498 से 8501/मुं/2011 (िन.व. 2006-07 To 2009-10) I.T.A No.8498 To 8501/Mum/2011 (A.Y.2006-07 To 2009-10) Assessment Years (Ay) 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10, Respectively. All The Impugned Orders Are Of Even Date I.E. 10.10.2011. Since, The Facts Germane To The Issue Raised In All The Appeals Are Identical & Identical Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Appeals, These Appeals Are Taken Up Together For Adjudication & Are Decided By This Common Order. 2. Sh. M. B. Sanghvi Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted At The Outset That The Appeal In Ita No. 8498/Mum/2011 For A.Y. 2006-07 May Be Taken As Lead Appeal For Culling Out The Facts. The Facts In The Other Appeals Are Identical.

For Appellant: S/Sh. M. B. Sanghvi & P.D. SanghviFor Respondent: Sh. Anchal Sharma, CIT-DR

M/S. Dharam Impex, Surat vs. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2008-09 in ITA No

ITA 1580/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.288 To 293/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2009-10 To 2014-15) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S Kangan Jewels Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of C/O 106, Saryu Chambers, Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Jadakhadi Mahidharpura, Surat- Surat 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadck 2552 R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.306 To 311/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09 To 2013-14) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.1579/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S Maniprabha Impex Pvt.Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of C/O 106, Saryu Chambers, Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Jadakhadi Mahidharpura, Surat- Surat 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm 6219 L अपीलाथ" /Appellant) ""यथ" /Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.312 To 317/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09 To 2013-14) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.1580/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S Dharam Impex Deputy Commissioner Of C/O 106, Saryu Chambers, Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Jadakhadi Mahidharpura, Surat- Surat 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaffd 2692 C अपीलाथ" /Appellant) ""यथ" /Respondent)

Section 144Section 153C

M/S. Maniprabha Impex Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Dy. CIT, Central Circle-4, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2008-09 in ITA No

ITA 1579/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.288 To 293/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2009-10 To 2014-15) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S Kangan Jewels Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of C/O 106, Saryu Chambers, Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Jadakhadi Mahidharpura, Surat- Surat 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadck 2552 R अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.306 To 311/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09 To 2013-14) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.1579/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S Maniprabha Impex Pvt.Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of C/O 106, Saryu Chambers, Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Jadakhadi Mahidharpura, Surat- Surat 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaecm 6219 L अपीलाथ" /Appellant) ""यथ" /Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./It(Ss)A Nos.312 To 317/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2008-09 To 2013-14) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos.1580/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S Dharam Impex Deputy Commissioner Of C/O 106, Saryu Chambers, Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Jadakhadi Mahidharpura, Surat- Surat 395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaffd 2692 C अपीलाथ" /Appellant) ""यथ" /Respondent)

Section 144Section 153C