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

Hitchki Creation Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 3104/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Ita Nos. 3104, 3105, 3106 & 3107/Del/2018 (Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Hitchki Creation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit 1St Floor, Plot No.9, 101, Central Circle Community Centre, Noida Sikka Complex, Preet Vihar, New Delhi – 110092 Pan No. Aacch 4195 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv. Shri Deepash Garg, Adv. Revenue By Shri Najmi, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 10.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.08.2021 Order Per Bench : These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Consolidated Order Dated 31.10.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv, Kanpur Relating To Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. 2 2. Before Us, At The Outset, Learned Ar Submitted That Though The Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are For Four Different Assessment Years, But The Issue Involved In All The Four Appeals Are Identical & He Has Common Submissions To Make. The Aforesaid Contention Of Learned Ar Has Not Been Controverted By Revenue. In View Of The Aforesaid Facts, We For The Sake Of Convenience Proceed To Dispose Of All The Four Appeals By A Consolidated Order But For The Sake Of Reference Refer To The Facts For A.Y. 2012-13. 3. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153CSection 43B