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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Rajesh Chimanlal Patel, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 530/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 468, 469 & 530/Ahd/2026 (Along With C.O. Nos. 16, 17 & 23/Ahd/2026) िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम/ Dcit, Rajesh Chimanlal Patel, Circle-1(1)(1), V S 202, Pavan Complex, Alkapuri, / . Vadodara Vadodara-390007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acqpp9018F (Appellant/Respondent) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr & Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/07/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals By The Revenue & The Corresponding Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Of Even Dated 22/12/2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2018-19 To 2020-21 Respectively. Since Common Facts & Issues Are Involved In All The Captioned Appeals & Cross Objections, Hence, The Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.468/Ahd/2026 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

For Appellant: Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69C

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Rajesh Chimanlal Patel, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 469/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 468, 469 & 530/Ahd/2026 (Along With C.O. Nos. 16, 17 & 23/Ahd/2026) िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम/ Dcit, Rajesh Chimanlal Patel, Circle-1(1)(1), V S 202, Pavan Complex, Alkapuri, / . Vadodara Vadodara-390007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acqpp9018F (Appellant/Respondent) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr & Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/07/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals By The Revenue & The Corresponding Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Of Even Dated 22/12/2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2018-19 To 2020-21 Respectively. Since Common Facts & Issues Are Involved In All The Captioned Appeals & Cross Objections, Hence, The Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.468/Ahd/2026 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

For Appellant: Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69C

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Rajesh Chimanlal Patel, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross

ITA 468/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Jul 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos. 468, 469 & 530/Ahd/2026 (Along With C.O. Nos. 16, 17 & 23/Ahd/2026) िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 बनाम/ Dcit, Rajesh Chimanlal Patel, Circle-1(1)(1), V S 202, Pavan Complex, Alkapuri, / . Vadodara Vadodara-390007 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acqpp9018F (Appellant/Respondent) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Assessee By : Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr & Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/07/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg: The Captioned Appeals By The Revenue & The Corresponding Cross Objections By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Separate Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’] Of Even Dated 22/12/2025 Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Years (Ay) 2018-19 To 2020-21 Respectively. Since Common Facts & Issues Are Involved In All The Captioned Appeals & Cross Objections, Hence, The Same Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order. Revenue’S Appeal Ita No.468/Ahd/2026 Is Taken As The Lead Case For The Purpose Of Narration Of Facts.

For Appellant: Shri Darshan B. Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR &
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 250Section 69C