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

Hi Klass Moving Picture P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 929/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri C.N.Prasad, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.926 To 931/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2007-08) Hiklass Moving Picture Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cir-6(3), Mumbai Ltd., 607/3, Navjivan Society, Lamingaton Road, Mumbai Central, Mumbai-400008 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 1582 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153C Of I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That There Was A Search U/S.132 In The Raisoni-Sancheti Group Of Cases. As A Part Of The Said Group, The Director Of Assessee-Company Shri Chaitanya Kochar Was Also Covered Under The Search Conducted. During The Course Of The Search Undertaken, It Was Found That The Assessee- Company Was A Paper Company Used By The Raisoni-Sancheti Group As A 2

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

Hi Klass Moving Picture P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 928/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri C.N.Prasad, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.926 To 931/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2007-08) Hiklass Moving Picture Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cir-6(3), Mumbai Ltd., 607/3, Navjivan Society, Lamingaton Road, Mumbai Central, Mumbai-400008 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 1582 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153C Of I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That There Was A Search U/S.132 In The Raisoni-Sancheti Group Of Cases. As A Part Of The Said Group, The Director Of Assessee-Company Shri Chaitanya Kochar Was Also Covered Under The Search Conducted. During The Course Of The Search Undertaken, It Was Found That The Assessee- Company Was A Paper Company Used By The Raisoni-Sancheti Group As A 2

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

Hi Klass Moving Picture P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 927/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri C.N.Prasad, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.926 To 931/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2007-08) Hiklass Moving Picture Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cir-6(3), Mumbai Ltd., 607/3, Navjivan Society, Lamingaton Road, Mumbai Central, Mumbai-400008 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 1582 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153C Of I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That There Was A Search U/S.132 In The Raisoni-Sancheti Group Of Cases. As A Part Of The Said Group, The Director Of Assessee-Company Shri Chaitanya Kochar Was Also Covered Under The Search Conducted. During The Course Of The Search Undertaken, It Was Found That The Assessee- Company Was A Paper Company Used By The Raisoni-Sancheti Group As A 2

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153ASection 153C

Hi Klass Moving Picture P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 926/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri C.N.Prasad, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.926 To 931/Mum/2013 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2007-08) Hiklass Moving Picture Pvt. Vs. Acit, Cir-6(3), Mumbai Ltd., 607/3, Navjivan Society, Lamingaton Road, Mumbai Central, Mumbai-400008 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 1582 K (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/08/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2002-03 To 2007-08, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153C Of I.T.Act. 2. Common Grounds Have Been Raised In All The Years Under Consideration. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That There Was A Search U/S.132 In The Raisoni-Sancheti Group Of Cases. As A Part Of The Said Group, The Director Of Assessee-Company Shri Chaitanya Kochar Was Also Covered Under The Search Conducted. During The Course Of The Search Undertaken, It Was Found That The Assessee- Company Was A Paper Company Used By The Raisoni-Sancheti Group As A 2

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153Section 153ASection 153C