Income Tax Search and Seizure | Case Laws on Significant Issues
- Blog|Income Tax|
- 34 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 17 April, 2023
Table of Contents
1. Search and Seizure – Nature of Provisions
2. Circumstances when Search can be Initiated
4. Validity of Search – Writ Jurisdiction
5. Actual Conduct of Search Operations
6. Seizure of Books of Account, Documents and Assets
7. Restraint Order- Section 132(3) and Section 132(8A)
8. Recording of Statement – Section 132(4)
9. Presumption under Section 132(4A)
10. Section 132(8)/132(10)/132(9)/132(9A)
11. Requisition under Section 132A
12. Assessment of search cases under section 153A/153C
13. Handling of Assessment in Search Cases
14. Penalties & Prosecution in Search Cases
15. Application to Settlement Commission in Search Cases
Check out Taxmann's Law Relating to Search & Seizure which provides an in-depth analysis of various provisions of law relating to Search & Seizure and assessment of search cases with the help of FAQs, checklists, and a reckoner of leading Case Laws. This book is amended by the Finance Act 2023 & Case Laws are updated until March 2023.
1. Search and Seizure – Nature of Provisions
1.1 Power of search to be exercised strictly in terms of law
- M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra AIR 1954 SC 300
- Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (1974) 93 ITR 505 (SC)
- Ramkibhai Kalidas v. I.G. Desai, ITO (1971) 80 ITR 721 (Guj.)
1.2 No power of arrest in the case of income tax search
- L.R. Gupta v. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del.)
- K. Choyi, ITO v. Syed Abdulla Bafakki Thangal (1973) 91 ITR 144 (Ker.)
2. Circumstances when Search can be Initiated
2.1 Provisions of section 132(1) to be construed strictly
- ITO v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Ganga Prasad Maheshwari v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
- L.R. Gupta v. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del.)
2.2 Authorisation of search on the basis of assumption of non-compliance of notice/summon as given under section 132(1)(b)
- Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (1974) 93 ITR 505 (SC)
- C. Venkata Reddy v. ITO (1967) 66 ITR 212 (Mys.)
- Lit Light & Co. v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 513 (All.)
- V.K. Jain v. Union of India (1975) 98 ITR 469 (Del.)
- Balwant Singh v. R.D. Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
2.3 Information in possession of the competent authority on the basis of which search is authorised not to be based upon rumours or suspicion or vague facts
- Dr. Nandlal Tahiliani v. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 592 (All.)
- Dr. Sushil Rastogi v. Director of Investigation, Income Tax Department (2003) 260 ITR 249 (All.)
- L.R. Gupta v. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del.)
- Seniram Doongarmal Agency (P.) Ltd. v. K.E. Johnson (1964) 52 ITR 637 (Assam) (FB)
- N.K. Textile Mills v. CIT (1966) 62 ITR 58 (Punj.)
- Harmel Singh v. Union of India (1993) 204 ITR 334 (P&H)
- Kusum Lata v. CIT (1989) 180 ITR 365 (Raj.)
- Jain & Jain v. Union of India (1982) 134 ITR 655 (Bom.)
- Pawan Solvent & Chemicals v. CIT (1987) 166 ITR 67 (Pat.)
- Tejram Omprakash (HUF) v. DIT (2014) 220 Taxman 85 (Mag.) (MP)(HC)
- Rajesh Rajora v. UOI (2014) 220 Taxman 146 (Mag.)(MP)(HC)
2.4 Information in possession of the competent authority on the basis of which search is authorised not to be general in nature
- Ganga Prasad Maheshwari v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
- Dr. Nandlal Tahiliani v. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 592 (All.)
- Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. Dy. DIT (2003) 260 ITR 67 (Cal.)
- L.R. Gupta v. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del.)
2.5 Information in possession of the competent authority on the basis of which search is authorised not for fishing or roving enquiry
- ITO v. Seth Bros. (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Balwant Singh v. R.D. Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
- Bharati (P.) Ltd. v. R.S. Chadda (1973) 89 ITR 108 (Cal.)
- I. Devarajan v. Tamil Nadu Farmers Services Co-op. Federation (1981) 131 ITR 506 (Mad.)
2.6 Information in possession of the competent authority on the basis of which search is authorised can be based upon reports from other authorities
- Sudarshan & Co. v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1032 (All.)
- Narayan Das v. CIT (1984) 148 ITR 567 (MP)
- Ganga Prasad Maheshwari v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
- Subir Roy v. S.K. Chattopadhyay (1986) 158 ITR 472 (Cal.)
- Orient (Goa) Ltd. v. Union of India (1994) 210 ITR 896 (Bom.)
- Harmel Singh v. Union of India (1993) 204 ITR 334 (P&H)
2.7 Before authorizing search information should be verified
- Lajpat Rai v. CIT (1995) 215 ITR 608 (All.)
- Lit Light & Co. v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 513 (All.)
- Diamondstar Exports Ltd. v. DGIT (Inv.) (2005) 278 ITR 36 (Bom.)
- M.S. Associates v. Union of India (2005) 275 ITR 502 (Gauhati)
- Dr. D.C. Srivastava v. DIT (Inv.) (2007) 212 CTR (All.) 527
- Union of India v. Ajit Jain (2003) 260 ITR 80 (SC)
- Doctor’s X Ray & Pathology Institute Pvt. Ltd. v. Director of Investigation (2009) 318 ITR 125 (All.)
- Genom Biotech Pvt. Ltd. v. DIT (Inv.) (2009) 224 CTR (Bom.) 270
- Balwant Singh v. R.D Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
- Ganga Prasad Maheshwari v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
- Gardhara Singh v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 340 (P&H)
- Dr. Nalini Mahajan v. DIT (Inv.) (2001) 252 ITR 123 (Del.)
- Farshubhai Prabhuram Bhai Kakkad v. DIT (Inv.) (2003) 264 ITR 87 (Guj.)
- Shyam Jewellers v. Chief Commissioner (Admn.) (1992) 196 ITR 243 (All.)
- Anand Swaroop v. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 575 (P&H)
2.8 Before authorizing search there has to be reason to believe not reason to suspect
- Balwant Singh v. R.D. Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
- Kusum Lata v. CIT (1989) 180 ITR 365 (Raj.)
- Ganga Prasad Maheshwari v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
- Vindhya Metal Corporation v. CIT (1985) 156 ITR 233 (All.)
- Kalpaka Bazar v. CIT (1990) 186 ITR 617 (Ker.)
- Dr. Partap Singh v. Director of Enforcement (1985) 155 ITR 166 (SC)
- Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (1974) 93 ITR 505 (SC)
- ITO v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Hazari Lal Soni v. Union of India (1994) 208 ITR 365 (Raj.)
- ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)
- Jain & Jain v. Union of India (1982) 134 ITR 655 (Bom.)
2.9 Formation of reason to believe separately for each person
- Harihar Shah v. CIT (2006) 281 ITR 199 (Gau.)
2.10 There has to be nexus between information and reason to believe
- Harvest Gold Foods (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2006) 282 ITR 83 (Raj.)
- Dr. Nandlal Tahiliani v. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 592 (All.)
- Lit Light & Co. v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 513 (All.)
2.11 Reasons recorded for authorizing search need not be communicated
- Mamchand & Co. v. CIT (1970) 76 ITR 217 (Cal.)
- Jain & Jain v. Union of India (1982) 134 ITR 655 (Bom.)
- Ram Swarup Sahu v. CIT (1992) 196 ITR 841 (Pat.)
2.12 Circumstances when survey can be converted into search
- Asstt. CIT v. Panchuram Deshmukh (2010) 40 DTR 252 (Bilaspur) (Trib.)/(2010) 133 TTJ (Bilaspur) 53
- Vinod Goel v. Union of India (2001) 252 ITR 29 (P&H)
- Asstt. CIT v. Mangaram Chaudhary HUF (2008) 119 TTJ (Hyd.) 671/(2010) 123 ITD 359
- Badri Ram Choudhary v. Asstt. CIT (2012) 67 DTR 107 (Jd.) (Trib.)/(2012) 145 TTJ (Jd) 7
3. Authorization of Search
3.1 Search warrant can be issued in joint name
- Dr. Oswald Anthony v. CIT (2004) 270 ITR 204 (Pat.)
- Madhupuri Corpn. v. Parbhat Jha, Dy. DIT (Investigation) (2002) 256 ITR 498 (Guj.)
- CIT v. Smt. Vandana Verma (2010) 186 Taxman 88 (All.)/(2011) 330 ITR 533
- Rajat Tradecom India (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2009) 23 DTR 311 (Ind.)/(2009) 120 ITD 48
- Jose Cyriac v. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 241 (Ker.)
- Naresh Chand Baid v. Asstt. CIT (2012) 66 DTR 221 (Chhattisgarh)
3.2 Issue of blank search warrant is illegal and may vitiate the whole process of search
- Jagmohan Mahajan v. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 579 (P&H)
- H.L. Sibal v. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 112 (P&H)
- Manmohan Krishan Mahajan v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 420 (P&H)
3.3 Search warrant is not required to be served to the person under search
- Jain & Jain v. Union of India (1982) 134 ITR 655 (Bom.)
- V.K. Jain v. Union of India (1975) 98 ITR 469 (Del.)
- Genom Biotech Pvt. Ltd. v. DIT (Investigation) (2009) 224 CTR (Bom.) 270
- Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT (1994) 207 ITR 55 (Ker.)
- Subir Roy v. S.K. Chattopadhyay (1986) 158 ITR 472 (Cal.)
4. Validity of Search – Writ Jurisdiction
4.1 Satisfaction note recorded by competent authority not to be shown to the person searched. Validity of satisfaction note cannot be subject matter to be decided by ITAT. Illegality of search can be decided by High Court/Supreme Court in writ jurisdiction
- Ram Swarup Sahu v. CIT (1992) 196 ITR 841 (Pat.)
- Mamchand & Co. v. CIT (1970) 76 ITR 217 (Cal.)
- Dr. Partap Singh v. Director of Enforcement (1985) 155 ITR 166 (SC)
- Rati Ram Gotte Wala v. DCIT (2004) 89 ITD 14 (Del.)
- M.B. Lal v. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 298 (Del.)
- Promain Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2006) 281 ITR (AT) 107 (Del.) (SB)
- CIT v. Paras Rice Mills (2008) 15 DTR 262 (P&H)/(2009) 313 ITR 0182 (P&H)
4.2 Validity of search
- Bhupendra Ratilal Thakkar v. CIT (1976) 102 ITR 531 (SC)
- Shyam Jewellers v. Chief Commissioner (Admn.) (1992) 196 ITR 243 (All.)
- CIT v. Tarsem Kumar (1986) 161 ITR 505 (SC)
- Tomar, I.S. Dr. v. DIT (1996) 85 Taxman 468 (All.)
- ITO v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Pawan Solvent & Chemicals v. CIT (1987) 166 ITR 67 (Pat.)
- Shree Krishna Investments v. Union of India AIR 1976 Cal. 333
- Dr. Nandlal Tahiliani v. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 592 (All.)
- CIT v. Dr. Nandlal Tahiliani (1988) 172 ITR 627 (SC)
- H.L. Sibal v. CIT (1975) 101 ITR 112 (P&H)
- Harmel Singh v. Union of India (1993) 204 ITR 334 (P&H)
- Chemitex v. Union of India (1982) Tax L.R. 2871 (Goa)
- Kusum Lata v. CIT (1989) 180 ITR 365 (Raj.)
4.3 Irregularity during search does not make the search illegal
- E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1974 SC 555
- Dr. Partap Singh v. Director of Enforcement (1985) 155 ITR 166 (SC)
- Express Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India AIR 1986 SC 872
- Takshila Educational Society v. DIT (Inv.) (2005) 272 ITR 274 (Pat.)
- Naraindas v. CIT (1984) 148 ITR 567 (MP)
- ITO v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Balwant Singh v. R.D. Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
- CIT v. Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair (2005) 282 ITR 158 (Ker.)
- CIT v. S.K. Katyal (2009) 308 ITR 168 (Del.)
- Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 70 (Ker.)
- VLS Finance Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 289 ITR 286 (Del.)
- Lan Eseda Steels Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1994) 209 ITR 901 (AP)
- Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (1974) 93 ITR 505 (SC)
4.4 Evidences collected during illegal search can be made use of by the department
- DGIT v. Diamondstar Exports Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 438 (SC)
- CIT v. Nandlal Tahiliani (1988) 172 ITR 627 (SC)
- Kusum Lata v. CIT (1989) 180 ITR 365 (Raj.)
- Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (1974) 93 ITR 505 (SC)
- L.R. Gupta v. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del.)
- Union of India v. Ajit Jain (2003) 260 ITR 80 (SC)
- Rakesh Kumar Agarwal v. DGIT (1996) 221 ITR 818 (Del.)
- Khandani Shafakhana v. Union of India (1989) 175 ITR 408 (Del.)
- ITO v. U.K. Mahapatra & Co. (2009) 225 CTR (SC) 131
- Dr. Partap Singh v. Director of Enforcement (1985) 155 ITR 166 (SC)
- Varghese Varghese v. Commissioner of Agricultural Income Tax (1976) 105 ITR 732 (Ker.)
- Thakursidas Banwarilal v. CIT (1998) 232 ITR 846 (Gau.)
- New Street Oil Mills v. State of Kerala (1978) 111 ITR 463 (Ker.)
- Balwant Singh v. R.D. Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
- Harikisandas Gulabdas & Sons v. State of Mysore (1971) 27 STC 434 (Mys.)
- Bishnu Krishna Shrestha v. Union of India (1987) 168 ITR 815 (Cal.)
4.5 High Court cannot examine sufficiency of reasons recorded by competent authority
- Balwant Singh v. R.D. Shah, Director of Inspection (1969) 71 ITR 550 (Del.)
- ITO v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. ITO (1961) 41 ITR 191 (SC)
- Kusum Lata v. CIT (1989) 180 ITR 365 (Raj.)
- Sudarshan & Co. v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1032 (All.)
- Southern Herbals Ltd. v. DIT Investigation (1994) 207 ITR 55 (Kar.)
- Shyam Jewellers v. Chief Commissioner (Admn.) (1992) 196 ITR 243 (All.)
- Suresh Bhai Bhola Bhai Jani v. Union of India (2001) 249 ITR 363 (Raj.)
- Director General of IT (Investigation) & Ors. v. Spacewood Furnishers (P.) Ltd. & Ors. (2015) 119 DTR (SC) 201
4.6 Scope of writ petition under article 226
- Sriram Jaiswal v. Union of India (1989) 176 ITR 261 (AR)
- Yogendra Kumar Durlabhji v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 405 (Raj.)
- Wakil Kumar v. CIT (2003) 259 ITR 698 (Pat.)
- Jagdish Prasad Saraogi v. Union of India (1997) 225 ITR 642 (Gau.)
- Namit Verma v. Union of India (2001) 247 ITR 49 (Del.)
5. Actual Conduct of Search Operations
5.1 Search should be completed expeditiously – No undue delay permitted
- Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 70 (Ker.)
- Shri Ganesh Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1994) 210 ITR 786 (Del.)
- CIT v. Sarb Consulate Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 444 (Del.)
5.2 Services of police officers permitted during search
- ITO v. Seth Brothers (1969) 74 ITR 836 (SC)
- Subir Roy v. S.K. Chattopadhyay (1986) 158 ITR 472 (Cal.)
6. Seizure of Books of Account, Documents and Assets
6.1 Seizure of assets belonging to other persons
- DIT (Inv.) v. S.R. Batliboi & Co. (2009) 224 CTR (Del.) 369/(2009) 315 ITR 137 (Del.)
- DIT (Inv.) v. S.R. Batliboi & Co. (2009) 227 CTR (SC) 238
6.2 Opportunity to assessee before seizure is made
- L.R. Gupta v. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del.)
6.3 Power to seal whole premises
- Shyam Jewellers v. Chief Commissioner (Admn.) (1992) 196 ITR 243 (All.)
6.4 Seizure of title deed of immovable property
- Bhagwan Das Narain Das v. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 194 (Guj.)
6.5 Immovable property cannot be seized
- Sardar Parduman Singh v. Union of India (1987) 166 ITR 115 (Del.)
- M.K. Gabrial Babu v. Asstt. DIT (1990) 186 ITR 435 (Ker.)
- Nand Kishore Mangharani v. DIT (1994) 210 ITR 1071 (All.)
- CIT v. M.K. Gabrial Babu (1991) 188 ITR 464 (Ker.)
- Rajendra Singh Nayak v. DCIT (2014) 268 CTR 484/227 Taxman 13 (Mag.) (MP)(HC)
6.6 No seizure of assets when source of acquisition is explained
- CIT v. Vindhya Metal Corporation (1997) 224 ITR 614 (SC)
- Biaora Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. DIT (Inv.) (2006) 281 ITR 247 (MP)
7. Restraint Order- Section 132(3) and Section 132(8A)
7.1 Restraint order u/s 132(3) can be passed only for books of account, other document or assets which are liable to be seized
- Windson Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2004) 269 ITR 481 (Cal.)
- Om Prakash Jindal v. Union of India (1976) 104 ITR 389 (Cal.)
- Ramesh Chander v. CIT (1974) 93 ITR 244 (P&H)
- Smt. Krishna Verma v. Asstt. CIT (2008) 113 ITD 655 (Del.) (SB)
- VLS Finance Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 289 ITR 286 (Del.)
- Mst. Anisa Bano v. CIT (1989) 177 ITR 368 (MP)
7.2 Restraint order u/s 132(3) not to be used to keep the search operation pending
- CIT v. Sandhya P. Naik (2002) 253 ITR 534 (Bom.)
- CIT v. S.K. Katyal (2009) 308 ITR 168 (Del.)
- CIT v. Sarb Consulate Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 444 (Del.)
- CIT v. Deepak Aggarwal (2009) 308 ITR 116 (Del.)
- M.B. Lal v. CIT (2005) 279 ITR 298 (Del.)
- VLS Finance Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 289 ITR 286 (Del.)
- Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair v. CIT (1999) 237 ITR 70 (Ker.)
7.3 Restraint order to be addressed to the assessee
- ITO v. M. Shajahan (1976) 104 ITR 347 (Ker.)
- Jain & Jain v. Union of India (1981) 134 ITR 655 (Bom.)
7.4 Restraint order to expire after 60 days
- Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. Dy. DIT (2003) 260 ITR 67 (Cal.)
7.5 Restraint order cannot be renewed from time to time
- Windson Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2004) 269 ITR 481 (Cal.)
- B.K. Nowlakha v. Union of India (1991) 192 ITR 436 (Del.)
7.6 Restraint order to be lifted expeditiously
- Ganesh Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1994) 75 Taxman 239 (Del.)/(1994) 210 ITR 786 (Del.)
7.7 Whether restraint order can be passed with respect to bank accounts, fixed deposits, etc.
- Devarajan v. Tamil Nadu Farmers Services Co-op. Federation (1981) 131 ITR 506 (Mad.)
- M.V. Gnanendra Nath v. Union of India (2004) 266 ITR 250, 254 (Kar.)
- Bhagwan Das Narayan Dass v. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 194 (Guj.)
- Mahesh Kumar Agarwal v. Dy. DIT (2003) 260 ITR 67 (Cal.)
7.8 Restraint order cannot be put on whole premises
- Shyam Jewellers v. Chief Commissioner (Admn.) (1992) 196 ITR 243 (All.)
7.7 Restraint order does not amount to seizure
- Mrs. Kanwal Shamsher Singh v. Union of India (1974) 95 ITR 80 (Del.)
- Ramesh Chander v. CIT (1974) 93 ITR 244 (P&H)
- B.K. Nowlakha v. Union of India (1991) 192 ITR 436 (Del.)
- CIT v. Sarb Consulate Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 444 (Del.)
- CIT v. Sandhya P. Nayak (2002) 253 ITR 534 (Bom.)
7.8 Prosecution for contravention of restraint order passed under section 132(3)
- State of Maharashtra v. Narayan Champalal Bajaj (1993) 201 ITR 315 (Bom.)
- State v. Rakesh Aggarwal (1995) 80 Taxman 539 (Del.)
8. Recording of Statement – Section 132(4)
8.1 Statement u/s 132(4) recorded on oath can be used as evidence in any proceedings under the Act
- Addl. CIT v. Hanuman Agarwal (1984) 17 Taxman 19 (Pat.)/(1985) 151 ITR 150 (Pat.)
- Chowkchand Balabux v. CIT (1961) 41 ITR 465 (Assam)
8.2 Evidentiary value of statement recorded u/s 132(4)
- Kesri K. Deboo v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 313 ITR 186 (Bom.)
- M.S. Aggarwal v. Dy. CIT (2004) 90 ITD 80 (Del.)
- Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC)
- Ravindra D. Trivedi v. CIT (2008) 215 CTR (Raj.) 313/(2008) 2 DTR 385 (Raj.)
- Dy. CIT v. Pramukh Builders (2008) 115 TTJ (Ahd.) (TM) 330/112 ITD 179 (Ahd.)(TM)
- Dy. CIT v. Bhogilal Mulchand Kandoi (2005) 98 TTJ (Ahd.) 108/96 itd 344 (Ahd.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Hokum Chand Jain (2010) 191 Taxman 319/337 ITR 238 (Chhattisgarh)
- Asstt. CIT v. Yerra Nagabhushanam (1997) 226 ITR 843 (AP)
- Shree Ganesh Trading Co. v. CIT (2013) 214 Taxman 262/257 CTR 159/84 DTR 94 (Jharkhand) (HC)
- Bhagirath Aggarwal v. CIT (2013) 351 ITR 143/215 Taxman 229/89 DTR 362 (Delhi) (HC)
8.3 Issue of summon under section 131(1A) after the conduct of search
- Dr. Mrs. Anita Sahai v. DIT (Inv.) (2004) 136 Taxman 247 (All.)/266 ITR 597 (All.)
- Arti Gases v. DIT (2004) 248 ITR 55 (Guj.)
- Dr. V.S. Chauhan v. Director of Income-tax (Investigations) (2011) 336 ITR 533 (All.)
- Neesa Leisure Ltd. v. Union of India (2011) 338 ITR 460 (Guj.)
8.4 Retraction of statement given under section 132(4)
- Nagubai Armul v. B. Sharma Rao AIR 1956 SC 100
- Sarwan Singh Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1957 SC 637
- Avadh Kishore Das v. Ram Gopal AIR 1979 SC 861
- Asstt. CIT v. Rameshchandra R. Patel (2005) 94 TTJ (Ahd.) (TM) 361/89 ITD 203 (Ahd.) (TM)
- Asstt. CIT v. Jorawar Singh M. Rathod (2005) 94 TTJ (Ahd.) 867
- Dhunjibhoy Stud & Agricultural Farm v. Dy. CIT (2002) 82 ITD 18 (Pune) (TM)
- Hiralal Maganlal & Co. v. Dy. CIT (2005) 96 ITD 113 (Mum.)
8.5 Consequences of retraction
- CIT v. Dr. N. Thippa Setty (2010) 322 ITR 525 (Kar.)
- CIT v. Medical Trust Hospital (2008) 220 CTR (Ker.) 166
8.6 In case of retraction burden of proof on assessee
- Krishan Lal Shiv Chand Rai v. CIT (1973) 88 ITR 293 (P&H)
- Karam Chand v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 73 ITD 434 (Chd.)\Video Master v. Jt. CIT (2002) 83 ITD 102 (Mum.)
- Dhanvarsha Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2006) 102 ITD 375 (Pune)
- Kantilal Prabhudas Patel v. Dy. CIT (Inv.) (2005) 93 ITD 117 (Indore) (TM)
- Carpenters Classics (Exim) Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2007) 108 ITD 142 (Bang.)
8.7 Undisclosed income can be assessed having regard to nature of evidences
- ITO v. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal (1990) 38 TTJ (Del.) 189
- Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC)
- Dy. CIT v. M.L. Jain (2005) 96 TTJ (Jodh.) 362
- Asstt. CIT v. Anoop Kumar (2005) 94 TTJ (Asr.) 288
- S.R.M.T. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2005) 97 TTJ (Visakha.) 580
9. Presumption under Section 132(4A)
9.1 Legal presumption is against the person having possession or control
- P.K. Narayanan v. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 596 (Ker.)
- ITO v. Prem Dass (1992) 198 ITR 93 (P&H)
- Kerala Liquor Corporation v. CIT (1996) 222 ITR 333 (Ker.)
- CIT v. K.I. Pavunny (1998) 232 ITR 837 (Ker.)
- Chuharmal v. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC)
- CIT v. Ashok Kumar (2006) 286 ITR 541 (All.)
- Hemant Kumar Ghosh v. Asstt. CIT A. Anr. (2015) 126 DTR (Pat.) 396 (HC)
9.2 Possession or control may be different from ownership
- ITO v. W.D. Estate Pvt. Ltd. (1993) 45 ITD 473 (Bom.) (TM)/(1993) 46 TTJ (Bom.) 143
- CIT v. K.K. Abdul Kareem (1996) 88 Taxman 323 (Ker.)/(1996) 132 CTR 431 (Ker.)
- CIT v. Soorajmal Nagarmull (1990) 181 ITR 340 (Cal.)
- Mangilal Agarwal v. Asstt. CIT (2008) 300 ITR 372 (Raj.)
- R. Bharathan v. ITO (1990) 182 ITR 146 (Ker.)
- Bansal Strips Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 99 ITD 177 (Del.)
- CIT v. Shravan Kumar Gurjar (2010) 230 CTR 539 (Del.)
9.3 Presumption is a rebuttable presumption
- Asstt. CIT v. Thahrayamal Balchand (1980) 124 ITR 111 (Raj.)
- CIT v. P.R. Metrani (HUF) (2001) 251 ITR 244 (Kar.)
- Biru Mal Pyare Lal v. Asstt. CIT (2001) 79 ITD 169 (Chd.)
- Shashikant M. Zaveri v. Sixth ITO (1990) 37 TTJ (Bom.) 120
- Asstt. CIT v. Radheyshyam Poddar (1992) 41 ITD 449 (Cal.)
- Bharathan (R.) v. ITO (1990) 182 ITR 146 (Ker.)
- CIT v. Kishanchand (1993) 45 TTJ (Jp.) 20
- CIT v. S.M.S. Investment Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (1994) 207 ITR 364 (Raj.)
- CIT v. Raj Pal Singh Ram Avtar (2007) 288 ITR 498 (All.)
- Sukh Ram v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 285 ITR 256 (Del.)
- Surendra M. Khandhar v. Asstt. CIT (2010) 321 ITR 254 (Bom.)
- CIT v. Ved Prakash Choudhary (2008) 305 ITR 245 (Del.)
- CIT v. D.R. Bansal (2010) 228 CTR (Chhattisgarh) 247/(2010) 327 ITR 44 (Chhattisgarh)
- CIT v. Blue Lines (2015) 231 Taxman 49 (Karn.)(HC)
9.4 Presumption is not binding on assessing officer
- Pradip Chandulal Patel v. P.G. Karode (1992) 197 ITR 385 (Guj.)
- ITO v. Abdul Majeed (1987) 64 CTR (Ker.) 266/(1988) 169 ITR 440 (Ker.)
- S.R.M.T. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2005) 97 TTJ (Visakha.) 580
- Anjuga Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2008) 113 ITD 67 (Chennai)
9.5 Presumption is available under regular assessment proceedings
- Pushkar Narain Sarraf v. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 388 (All.)
- P.R. Metrani v. CIT (2006) 287 ITR 209 (SC)
- Ashwani Kumar v. ITO (1991) 39 ITD 183 (Del.)
9.6 Onus to establish income of the assessee remains on assessing officer
- Doon Valley Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. IAC (1989) 31 ITD 238 (Del.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Sri Radheshyam Poddar (1992) 41 ITD 449 (Cal.)
- Kollipara Subba Rao v. ITO (1990) 32 ITD 668 (Hyd.)
- CIT v. D.K. Gupta (2009) 308 ITR 230 (Del.)
- Amar Natvarlal Shah v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 60 ITD 560 (Ahd.)
- Brijlal Rupchand v. ITO (1991) 40 TTJ (Indore) 668
- Asstt. CIT v. Ashok Kumar Poddar (2008) 16 DTR (Kol.) (Trib.) 55
9.7 No presumption against third party
- Straptex (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2003) 84 ITD 320 (Mum.)
- Rama Traders v. First ITO (1988) 32 TTJ (Pat.) (TM) 483
- Kishanchand Sobhrajmal v. Asstt. CIT (1992) 41 ITD 97 (Jp.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Kishore Lal Balwant Rai (2007) 17 SOT 380 (Chd.)
- Sheth Akshay Pushpavadan v. Dy. CIT (2010) 130 TTJ (Ahd.) (UO) 42
10. Section 132(8)/132(10)/132(9)/132(9A)
10.1 Approval for extension for retention of books of account, documents, etc. to be granted before expiry of the period
- CIT v. Jawahar Lal Rastogi (1970) 78 ITR 486 (SC)
- Metal Fittings Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1983) 141 ITR 758 (Del.)
10.2 Application and release of disclosed assets seized
- Gordhanbhai Nagardas Patel v. Deputy CIT [2017] 82 taxmann.com 455/249 Taxman 604 (Guj.
- Fatema Hussain v. Union of India [2017] 88 taxmann.com 725 (Patna)
- Hyderabad Vanaspathi Ltd. v. ITO (1984) 19 Taxman 422 (AP)/(1985) 152 ITR 1 (AP)
- Hanuman Pershad Ganeriwala v. Director of Inspection (1974) 93 ITR 419 (Del.)
- Sampat Lal & Sons v. CIT (1984) 150 ITR 191 (MP)
10.3 Commissioner’s approval for retention to be communicated
- Arti Gases v. DIT (Inv.) (2001) 248 ITR 55 (Guj.)
- State Bank of Patiala v. S.K. Sharma AIR 1996 SC 1669
- Managing Director, ECIL v. B. Karunakar AIR 1994 SC 1074
10.4 Extension for retention can be granted repeatedly as may be required
- Smt. Vidya Devi v. ITO 1972 Tax LR 572
- Mohan Magotra v. DIT (2002) 177 CTR 352 (J&K)
10.5 Release of books of account or documents illegally seized
- K.R. Modi & Co. v. Dy. DIT (Inv.) (2005) 272 ITR 587 (Cal.)
10.6 Release of books of account or documents relating to other persons seized
- Wakil Kumar v. CIT (2003) 259 ITR 698 (Pat.)
- Raj Kumar Sharma v. Secretary, Government of India (2002) 175 CTR (P&H) 49
10.7 Illegal retention of books of account, other documents
- Thanthi Trust v. CIT (1987) 167 ITR 397 (Del.)
- Krishna Kumar Sharma v. CIT (1991) 192 ITR 57 (All.)
- Cowasjee Nusserwanji Dinshaw v. ITO (1987) 165 ITR 702 (Guj.)
- C.K. Wadha v. CIT (1970) 78 ITR 782 (Cal.)
- Khandani Shafakhana v. Union of India (1989) 175 ITR 408 (Del.)
- Rakesh Kumar Agarwal v. DGIT (1996) 221 ITR 818 (Del.)
- Survir Enterprises v. CIT (1986) 157 ITR 206 (Del.)
- Director of Inspection v. K.C.A. & Co. (1987) 32 Taxman 495 (J&K)/(1990) 185 ITR 475 (J&K)
- Metal Fittings Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1983) 141 ITR 758 (Del.)
10.8 Right to obtain photocopies of books of account, other documents seized
- New Kashmir & Oriental Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (1973) 92 ITR 334 (All.)
- Ramesh Chander v. CIT (1974) 93 ITR 244 (P&H)
- Dhaniram Gupta v. Union of India (1973) 89 ITR 281 (Cal.)
10.9 Immediate release of deposits seized from disclosed bank accounts
- D.R. Benefit Fund Limited v. Asstt. DIT (Inv.) (2006) 203 CTR (Mad.) 453/(2008) 297 ITR 346 (Mad.)
10.10 Conversion of assets in kind into money
- K.C.C. Software Ltd. v. DIT (Inv.) (2008) 298 ITR 001 (SC)
- Raj Kumar v. Union of India (2000) 242 ITR 584 (P&H)
- Windson Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2004) 141 Taxman 419 (Cal.)/(2004) 269 ITR 0481 (Cal.)
- Jagdishprasad M. Joshi v. Dy. CIT (2005) 273 ITR 296 (Bom.)
10.11 No retention of seized assets during pendency of appeal by the department
- Naresh Kumar Kohli v. CIT (2004) 137 Taxman 438 (P&H)
- Mukundray K. Shah v. DGIT (2004) 141 Taxman 381/269 ITR 529 (Cal.)
- Bhagwat Prasad v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 961 (All.)
- Asha Devi v. CIT (2007) 291 ITR 496 (Del.)
- Bhawna Lodha (Smt.) v. DGIT (2013) 354 ITR 134/214 Taxman 273/257 CTR 176 (Raj.)(HC)
10.12 Release of assets against deposit of cash, furnishing of bank guarantee
- Hasmukhlal Bagdiya v. Asstt. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 50 (MP)
- Rajinder Pal Mahajan v. Ralson India Ltd. (1995) 211 ITR 828 (P&H)
- Subodhchandra & Co. v. ITO (1995) 215 ITR 95 (Guj.)
- Pooran Sugar Works v. Asstt. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 221 (All.)
- Smt. Surinder Kaur v. Union of India (2000) 245 ITR 135 (Del.)
- Ramnath Kapoor v. CIT (2011) 57 DTR 311 (MP)
10.13 No application of seized assets for liability of subsequent years
- Vinod Poddar v. CIT (1994) 208 ITR 722 (Pat.)
- J.R. Malhotra v. Additional Session’s Judge AIR 1976 SC 219
10.14 No application of seized assets against tax liability of third persons
- Naresh Kumar Kohli v. CIT (2004) 266 ITR 553 (P&H)
- Smt. Shobha Sengar v. CIT (2000) 244 ITR 10 (All.)
10.15 Mandatory for AO to adjust seized amount against demand under section 140A
- Ravinder Singh v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 89 ITD 477 (Asr.)
10.16 Seized amount to be treated as tax paid by the assessee, if requested
- Rajesh Kumar Vinit Kumar v. CIT (2006) 283 ITR 395 (All.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Topsel Pvt. Ltd. (1996) 56 TTJ (Cal.) 621/(1996) 56 ITD 186 (Cal.)
- Ramjilal Jagannath v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 241 ITR 758 (MP)
- Satpaul D. Agarwal (HUF) v. Asstt. CIT (1998) 62 TTJ (ITAT- Mum.) 98
- Gopal Chand Khandelwal v. Asstt. CIT (1995) 52 ITD 661 (Del. – Trib.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Raghunandan Lal (2002) 82 ITD 436 (Chd.)
- Iqbal Chand Khurana v. Dy. CIT (2001) 70 TTJ (ITAT- Del.) 16
10.17 Release of seized assets to whom?
- Smt. Kusum Lata Singhal v. CIT (1990) 185 ITR 56 (SC)
- Assainar v. ITO (1975) 101 ITR 854 (Ker.)
- Balkrishna Ramgopal Ruia v. Union of India (1990) 185 ITR 328 (Bom.)
10.18 Payment of interest on release of seized amount
- Anilkumar Bhagwandas v. P.K. Tiwari (1999) 238 ITR 788 (Guj.)
- Anilkumar D. Gajjar v. CIT (1996) 220 ITR 470 (Guj.)
- Manohar Lal v. CIT (2001) 249 ITR 1 (MP)
- Mohammed Usman v. Union of India (1997) 224 ITR 730 (Del.)
- Ashok Kumar Aggarwal v. Director (Grievances Cell), CBDT (2005) 279 ITR 161 (Del.)
- Bhagwan Prasad Agarwal v. CIT (2006) 282 ITR 189 (All.)
- Ajay Gupta v. CIT (2008) 297 ITR 125 (Del.)
- Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 643 (SC)
- Dr. R.M. Saboo v. Asstt. CIT (2005) 92 TTJ (Hyd.) 1078/92 ITD 532 (Hyd.)
- Kishore Jagjivandas Tanna v. K. Rangrajan (2008) 306 ITR 121 (Bom.)
- Sitaram v. CIT 68 DTR 230 (Bom.)/248 CTR 180 (Bom.)/(2012) 341 ITR 549 (Bom.)
- Mohit Singh v. Asstt. CIT (2011) 53 DTR 153/(2011) 241 CTR 244 (Del.)
- Prem Nath Nagpal v. Asstt. CIT (2010) 34 DTR 1/128 TTJ 53 (Del. ‘H’)
- CIT v. Kesr Karyalya (2005) 196 CTR 611 (Del.)/(2005) 278 ITR 596 (Del.)
- CIT v. Ashok Kumar (2011) 334 ITR 355 (P&H)
- CIT v. Arun Kapoor (2011) 334 ITR 351 (P&H)
- Vishwanath Khanna v. Union of India (2011) 335 ITR 548/(2011) 61 DTR 318/(2011) 244 CTR 208 (Del.)
- Chironjilal Sharma (HUF) v. UOI (2013) 263 CTR 625/96 DTR 305/(2014) 360 ITR 237/222 Taxman 352 (SC)
- S.K. Jain v. CIT (2013) 354 ITR 84/215 Taxman 237/87 DTR 264 (Delhi)(HC)
- Om Prakash Agrawal v. UOI (2013) 81 DTR 341/214 Taxman 5 (Mag.)/255 CTR 445 (MP)(HC)
10.19 Damages in case of delay or irregularity in release of assets
- DGIT v. Diamond Star Exports Ltd. (2006) 156 Taxman 299 (SC)/(2007) 293 ITR 438 (SC)
- Kuber Planters Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2006) 150 Taxman 11 (Del.)
11. Requisition under Section 132A
11.1 Requisition to be made after recording satisfaction in consequence of information in possession of the competent authority
- CIT v. Vindhya Metal Corporation (1997) 224 ITR 614 (SC)
- B.R. Metal Ltd. v. CIT (1999) 239 ITR 329 (Gau.)
- Ramesh Chander v. CIT (1974) 93 ITR 244 (P&H)
- Biaora Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. DIT (Inv.) (2006) 281 ITR 247 (MP)
- Shree Janki Solvent Extractions Ltd. v. Dy. DIT (1996) 221 ITR 30 (All.)
- DIT (Inv.) v. Payal Selection Co. (2008) 307 ITR 377 (MP)
- Sudarshan & Co. v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1032 (All.)
- Ibrahim Othayoth v. Sub-Inspector of Police (1998) 232 ITR 320 (Ker.)
- Arun Kumar Chajjar v. Collector of Customs (Preventive) 1995 (75) ELT 747 (Cal.)
- Ganga Prasad Maheshwari v. CIT (1983) 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
- Manju Tandon v. T.N. Kapoor, Dy. Superintendent of Police (1978) 115 ITR 473 (All.)
- Krishnagopal v. DI (Inv.) (2009) 308 ITR 273 (MP)
- Amar Agrawal v. DIT (Investigation) (2005) 276 ITR 182 (MP)
- Smt. Suman Singhai v. Director of IT (Investigation) (2011) 335 ITR 188 (MP)
- M. Manoj Kumar & Co. v. Director of IT (Investigation) (2011) 242 CTR 309 (MP)Atta Husain v. Director of IT (Inv.) (2011) 60 DTR 25 (MP)/246 CTR 207 (MP)
- Prakash Jaichand Shah v. DIT (Investigations) (2013) 350 ITR 336/255 CTR 403/81 DTR 396 (Guj.)(HC)
11.2 Requisition can be made to which authority
- Janardan Das v. Bindeshwari Prasad Sah (1999) 238 ITR 65 (Pat)
- Balbir Singh (Decd.) Through L/R Mrs. Dilpati v. CIT (1984) 146 ITR 266 (P&H) affirmed in CIT v. Balbir Singh (1993) 203 ITR 650 (P&H)
- Chander Prakash Agrawal v. State of Rajasthan (1994) 119 CTR 216 (Raj)/205 ITR 562 (Raj.)
- Abdul Khader v. Sub-Inspector of Police (1999) 240 ITR 489 (Ker.)
- CIT v. Balbir Singh (Decd.) (1984) 203 ITR 650 (P&H)
- Samta Constructions Co. v. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Dy. DIT (Inv.) (2000) 244 ITR 845 (MP)
- Srinivasan v. Dy. Superintendent of Police (1973) 91 ITR 308 (Mad.)
- Sadruddin Javeri v. Government of Andhra Pradesh (2000) 243 ITR 579 (AP)
- Suresh Bhai Bhola Bhai Jani v. Union of India (2001) 249 ITR 363 (Raj)
- Amandeep Singh v. DIT (2001) 252 ITR 139 (P&H)
- Parasnath v. Union of India (1997) 225 ITR 365 (MP)
- Babu Rao v. Inspector of Police (1991) 190 ITR 616 (Mad.)
- Union of India v. Judicial Magistrate (1993) 140 ITR 553 (All.)
- Smt. Surinder Kaur v. Union of India (2000) 245 ITR 135 (Del.)
- Babu Lal v. DIT (2006) 281 ITR 70 (All.)
11.3 Provision of section 153C may be applicable for requisitioned assets
- Smt. Mithilesh Kumari Jain v. CIT (1994) 209 ITR 337 (All.)
11.4 Applicability of provision of section 153A when requisition is made but actual delivery of seized material is not received
- Asstt. CIT v. Sonu Verma (2008) 305 ITR (AT) 406 (Asr.)
- Amandeep Singh v. DIT (Inv.) (2001) 252 ITR 139 (P&H)
- Chandra Prakash Agrawal v. State (1994) 205 ITR 562 (Raj.)
- Jageshwar Rosin & Turpentine Factory v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 102 TTJ (Del.) 670/100 ITD 399 (Del.)
- Smt. Mahesh Kumari Batra v. Jt. CIT (2005) 95 ITD 152 (Asr.)
12. Assessment of search cases under section 153A/153C
12.1 Assessment for the preceding seventh year prior to the year of search can be reopened under section 148
- Ramballabh Gupta v. Asstt. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 347 (MP)
12.2 Pending assessment or reassessment to abate
- Abhay Kumar Shroff v. CIT (2007) 290 ITR 114 (Jharkhand)
- CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2018] 93 taxmann.com 294/255 Taxman 286
12.3 Fresh assessments to be framed for all the preceding six years whether assessment proceedings are abated or not
- Meghmani Organics Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Ahd.) 255
- LMJ International Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2008) 119 TTJ (Kol.) 214
- Anil Kumar Bhatia v. Asstt. CIT (2010) 1 ITR (Trib.) 484 (Del.)
- Anil P. Khemani v. Dy. CIT in ITA 2855 to 2860/Mum/2008 dated 23.2.2010.
- CIT v. Raj Kumar Arora (2014) 120 DTR (All) 417 (HC)
12.4 Issues regarding filing of return under section 153A
- CIT v. B. G. Shirke Construction Technology (P.) Ltd. [2017] 79 taxmann.com 306/246 Taxman 300 (Bom).
- Principal CIT v. Vijay Infrastructure Ltd. 402 ITR 363 (All Principal CIT v. JSW Steel Ltd. 187 DTR (Bom) 1
- Shrikant Mohta v. CIT [2018] 257 Taxman 43/95 taxmann.com 224 (Cal.)
- Mahavir Manakchand Bhansali v. CIT [2017] 88 taxmann.com 609 (Bom.)
- CIT v. Deepak Kumar Agarwal [2017] 86 taxmann.com 3/251 Taxman 22 (Bom).
- Principal CIT v. Ram Avtar Verma [2017] 88 taxmann.com 666
- Principal CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia Prop. M/s. Ferns “N” Petals [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi)
- Principal CIT v. Dipak Jashvantlal Panchal [2017] 88 taxmann.com 611 (Guj).
- CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2018] 93 taxmann.com 294/255 Taxman 286 (SC)
- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dipak J Panchal [2017] 98 CCH 0074 (Guj).
- Principal CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. 397 ITR 82/159 DTR 257 (Del)
- CIT v. S. Ajit Kumar [2018] 93 taxmann.com 294/255 Taxman 286 (SC)
- Principal CIT v. Sunrise Finlease (P.) Ltd. [2018] 89 taxmann.com 1/252 Taxman 407 (Guj.)
12.5 No other assessment or reassessment proceedings during pendency of proceedings under section 153A
- CIT v. Jaideo Jain & Co. (1997) 227 ITR 302 (Raj.)
12.6 Revision of returns filed in pursuance to notice under section 153A
- ITO v. Banarsi Lal Satya Narain (1995) 55 ITD 372 (Pat.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Cavinkare (P) Ltd. [2009] 120 ITD 126 (Chennai)
12.7 Seizure of cash during search – Whether adjustable as advance tax
- Satya Prakash Sharma v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 20 DTR 561 (Del.) (Trib.)
- Sudhakar M. Shetty v. Asstt. CIT (2008) 10 DTR 173 (Mum.)(Trib.)
- CIT v. K.K. Marketing (2005) 278 ITR 596 (Del.)
- Gian Chand Gupta v. Dy. CIT (2002) 80 ITD 548 (Del.)
- Dy. CIT v. Gold Tax Furnishing Industries (2001) 73 TTJ (Del.) 223
- Ramjinath Jagannath v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 241 ITR 758 (MP)
- CIT v. Pandurang Dayaram Talmale (2004) 135 Taxman 193 (Bom.)/187 CTR 625 (Bom.)
12.8 Whether assessment in pursuance to notice under section 153A is in the nature of de novo assessment
- Dy. CIT v. Sushil Kumar Jain (2010) 48 DTR 185 (Ind.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC)
- CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561 (SC)
- Vipan Khanna v. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 220 (P&H)
- Suncity Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 124 TTJ (Jodh.) 674
- CIT v. Piara Singh (1980) 124 ITR 40 (SC)
- LMJ International Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2008) 119 TTJ (Kol.) 214
- Meghmani Organics Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Ahd.) 255
- Anil Kumar Bhatia v. Asstt. CIT (2010) 1 ITR (Trib.) 484 (Del.)
- Shivnath Rai Harnarain (India) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2008) 117 TTJ (Del.) 480/117 ITD 74 (Del.)
- Shyam Lata Kaushik v. Asstt. CIT (2008) 114 TTJ (Del.) 940/114 ITD 305 (Del.)
12.9 Notice under section 143(2) within time limit as prescribed is mandatory in case of proceedings under section 153A
- Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC)
- Dy. CIT v. Sushil Kumar Jain (2010) 48 DTR 185 (Ind.)
- Ashok Chaddha v. ITO (2011) 337 ITR 399 (Del.)
- Narendra Singh v. ITO (2011) 138 TTJ (Agra) 615/130 ITD 509 (Agra)
12.10 Recording of satisfaction before invoking provision of section 153C
- Manish Maheshwari v. Asstt. CIT (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC)
- CIT v. Dawn View Farms (P) Ltd. (2009) 178 Taxman 15 (Del.)/224 CTR 504 (Del.)
- Asstt. CIT v. R.P. Singh (2007) 111 TTJ (Del.) 880
- CIT v. Late Raj Pal Bhatia (2011) 49 DTR 9 (Del.)/333 ITR 315 (Del.)
- Vijay Sehgal (HUF) v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 100 ITD 560 (Asr.)
- Y. Subbaraju & Co. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 85 TTJ 670/91 ITD 118 (Bang.) (SB)
- Shoreline Hotel (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2008) 116 TTJ (Mum.) 536
- Manoj Aggarwal v. Dy. CIT (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del.)
- Pepsi Foods (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2014) 367 ITR 112 (Delhi) (HC)
12.11 Analysis of provision of section 153C
- Principal CIT v. N.S. Software (Firm) [2018] 93 taxmann.com 21/255 Taxman 230 (Delhi)
- CIT v. Smt. Nirmala Keshwani 79 taxmann.com 399
- CIT v. Calcutta Knitwears 43 taxmann.com 446/223 Taxman 115 (Mag.) (SC)
- Principal CIT v. Jitendra H. Modi [2018] 403 ITR 110 (Guj).
- Ganpati Fincap Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2017] 82 taxmann.com 408 (Delhi)
- Tapan Kumar Dutta v. CIT [2018] 92 taxmann.com 367/255 Taxman 200 (SC)
- Shyamraj Singh v. Dy. CIT 411 ITR 709 (Kar)
- Principal CIT v. Himanshu Chan-dulal Patel, C/TAXAP/342/2019 (Guj)
- CIT v. Smt. Soudha Gafoor 408 ITR 246 (Ker)
- Super Malls (P) Ltd. v. Principal CIT 187 DTR (SC) 257
- Principal CIT v. Dreamcity Buildwell (P.) Ltd [2019] 110 taxmann.com 28/266 Taxman 465 (Delhi)
- Asstt. CIT v. Dr. Ranjan Pai [2019] 109 taxmann.com 90/178 ITD 647 (Bang.)
- Principal CIT v. Vinita Charurasia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 153/248 Taxman 172 (Delhi)
- CIT v. Arpit Land P. Ltd. 154 DTR 241 (Bom).
- Canyon Financial Services Ltd. v. ITO [2017] 84 taxmann.com 71/249 Taxman 493 (Delhi)
- Principal CIT v. Index Securities P Ltd. 304 CTR 67/157 DTR 20 (Delhi)
- CIT v. Renu Constructions P. Ltd. [2018] 99 taxmann.com 426 (Delhi)
- CIT v. Lavanya Land Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 83 taxmann.com 161/249 Taxman 275 (Bom.)
- Principal CIT v. Dreamcity Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 110 taxmann.com 28/266 Taxman 465 (Delhi)
- Pr. CIT v. Krutika Land (P.) Ltd. [2019] 103 taxmann.com 9/261 Taxman 454 (SC)
12.12 Issues regarding assessment under section 153C
- Anil Kumar Gopikishan Agrawal v. Asstt. CIT [2019] 106 taxmann.com 137 (Guj.)
12.13 Jurisdiction under section 153C can be assumed when seized material belong or belongs to other person
- Vijaybhai N. Chandrani v. Asstt. CIT (2010) 38 DTR (Guj.) 225
- P. Srinivas Naik v. Asstt. CIT (2008) 114 TTJ (Bang.) 856/117 ITD 201 (Bang.)
- Meghmani Organics Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Ahd.) 255
- Bhajan Das & Brothers v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 119 ITD 76 (Agra) (TM)
- ITO v. Arun Kumar Kapoor (2011) 140 TTJ 249 (Asr.)
12.14 Opportunity of hearing not required to be given by additional commissioner before granting approval to assessment orders under section 153A/153C
- Kailash Moudgil v. Dy. CIT (2000) 72 ITD 97 (Del.) (SB)
- Sree Rama Medical & Surgical Agencies v. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 245 (AP)
- Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 64 TTJ (Cal.) 719/68 ITD 148 (Cal.)
12.15 Time limit for completing assessment in search cases
- CIT v. Anil Minda (2010) 328 ITR 320 (Del.)
- CIT v. Sandhya P. Naik (2002) 253 ITR 534 (Bom.)
- C. Ramaiah Reddy v. Asstt. CIT (2003) 87 ITD 439 (Bang.) (SB)
- Mahakoshal Engineers & Contractors Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2003) 85 ITD 267 (Nag.)
- Babu Lal v. DIT (2006) 281 ITR 70 (All.)
- DTS Rao v. Asstt. CIT (2007) 106 ITD 570 (Bang.)
- Dy. CIT v. Adolf Patric Pinto (2006) 100 ITD 191 (Mum.)
- Shanti Lal Godawat v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 30 DTR 413 (Jd.)/126 TTJ (Jd) 135
- A.S. Precision Machines (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2017] 79 taxmann.com 421 (P&H)
- Rajan Jewellery v. CIT [2019] 109 taxmann.com 104/266 Taxman 357 (Ker.)
- K.V. Padmanabhan v. Asstt. CIT [2019] 107 taxmann.com 24/265 Taxman 36 (Ker.)
12.16 Nature and scope of provisions of section 153A
- Bansilal B. Raisoni & Sons v. Asstt. CIT 173 DTR 68 (Bom).
12.17 Fresh Assessment pursuant to order u/s 263 – Whether fresh approval u/s 153D required – Debatable
- Osho Forge Ltd. v. CIT [2018] 93 taxmann.com 369/255 Taxman 375 (P&H)
13. Handling of Assessment in Search Cases
13.1 Obtaining photocopies of seized material
- CIT v. Oriental Rubber Works (1984) 145 ITR 477 (SC)
- Jorawar Singh Baid v. Asstt. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 664 (Cal.)
- Dhani Ram Gupta v. Union of India (1973) 89 ITR 281 (Cal.)
13.2 Telescoping of additions against general declaration of undisclosed income
- Eagle Seeds & Biotech Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 100 ITD 301 (Indore)
- Ram Lubhaya v. Asstt. CIT (1995) 52 TTJ (Del.) 21
- Kantilal & Bros. v. Asstt. CIT (1995) 51 TTJ (Pune) 513/52 ITD 412 (Pune)
- CIT v. K.S.M. Guruswamy Nadar & Sons (1984) 149 ITR 127 (Mad.)
13.3 Principal of peak balance
- Addl. CIT v. Chetan Dass (1975) 99 ITR 46 (Del.)
- Addl. CIT v. Dharamdas Agarwal (1983) 144 ITR 143 (MP)
- Addl. CIT v. Mohan Engineering Co. (1985) 151 ITR 571 (Pat.)
- CIT v. Neemar Ram Badlu Ram (1980) 122 ITR 68 (All.)
- Surendra M. Khandar v. Asstt. CIT (2001) 76 ITD 121 (Mum.)
- Essem Intra Port Services (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 72 ITD 228 (Hyd.)
13.4 Adjustment against intangible additions
- CIT v. Jawanmal Gemaji Gandhi (1985) 151 ITR 353 (Bom.)
- Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT (1980) 123 ITR 457 (SC)
- CIT v. S. Nelliappan (1967) 66 ITR 722 (SC)
13.5 Reference to departmental valuation officers in search cases
- Hanemp Properties (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 285 ITR 26 (Del.) (AT)
- ITO v. Hotel Hilltop (1995) 52 TTJ (Jp.) 539
13.6 Reference for special audit under section 142(2A)
- Maya Spinners Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (Assessment) (2008) 306 ITR 137 (Indore)
- Rajendra C. Singh v. Jt. CIT (2009) 118 ITD 99 (Mum.)
- Sahara India (Firm) v. CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC)
13.7 Reliance on statement recorded by authorised officer during search
- Chander Mohan Mehta v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 71 ITD 245 (Pune)
- CIT v. Mrs. Doris S. Luiz (1974) 96 ITR 646 (Kar.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Mrs. Sushila Devi Agarwal (1994) 49 TTJ (Ahd.) 663/(1994) 50 ITD 524 (Ahd.)
- CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2006) 282 ITR 259 (Mad.) affirmed in CIT v. P.V. Kalyanasundaram (2007) 294 ITR 49 (SC)
- Ramesh Pershad v. IAC (1989) 28 ITD 550 (Hyd.)
- Pushpa Vihar v. Asstt. CIT (1994) 48 TTJ (Bom.) 389
- Madras Bangalore Transport v. CIT (1991) 190 ITR 679 (Mad.)
- S. Arjan Singh v. CWT (1989) 175 ITR 91 (Delhi)
- Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC)
- CIT v. Ravi Kant Jain (2001) 250 ITR 141 (Del.)
- Hotel Kumar Palace v. CIT (2006) 283 ITR 110 (P&H)
- Kishinchand Chelaram v. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (SC)
- Jindal Stainless Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 120 ITD 301 (Del.)
- Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi v. CIT (2008) 14 DTR 257 (Guj.)/328 ITR 411 (Guj.)
- ITO v. Akshay Bhandar (1990) 33 ITD 13 (Gau.)
13.8 No addition for investment in jewellery upto specified limit not required to be seized
- Smt. Salochana Devi Jaiswal v. Dy. CIT (2004) 90 TTJ (Jab.) 974
- Smt. Bommana Swarna Rekha v. Asstt. CIT (2005) 95 TTJ (Visakha) 885
- Jai Kumar Jain v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 99 TTJ (Jp.) 744
- Rajendra C. Shah v. Jt. CIT [2007] 158 Taxman 170 (Mum.)
- CIT v. M.S. Agrawal (HUF) (2008) 11 DTR 169 (MP)/236 CTR 538 (MP)
- Dy. CIT v. Gordhandas Lachmandas (2008) 16 DTR 26 (Mum.) (Trib.)
- CIT v. Ratanlal Vyaparilal Jain (2010) 45 DTR 290 (Guj.)/339 ITR 351 (Guj.)
- Lal Chand v. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 399 (All.)
- Dy. CIT v. Arjun Dass Kalwani (2006) 101 ITD 337 (Jodh.)
- Manibhai S. Patel v. WTO (1991) 37 ITD 485 (Ahd.)
- Gautam Laljibhai Gajar v. ITO (1991) 41 TTJ (Ahd.) 542/37 ITD 514 (Ahd.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Smt. Parbati Ganguly (1992) 44 TTJ (Cal.) 108
- V.G.P. Ravidas v. Asstt. CIT (2014) 121 DTR (Mad) 44 (HC)
13.9 Assessment in the case of retraction of surrender of undisclosed income
- Kailashben Manharlal Chokshi v. CIT 14 DTR 257 (Guj.)/328 ITR 711 (Guj.)
- ITO v. Bua Dass [2006] 155 Taxman 130 (Asr.-Trib.)
- CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works 48 DTR 230 (Del.)/328 ITR 384 (Del.)
- Bachittar Singh v. CIT 48 DTR 236 (P&H)/328 ITR 400 (P&H)
- CIT v. Jagdish Chand Gupta 47 DTR 156 (P&H)/329 ITR 583 (P&H)
- Carpenters Classics (Exim) P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2008) 299 ITR 124 (Bang.)
- Hotel Kiran v. Asstt. CIT (2002) 82 ITD 453 (Pune)
- Asstt. CIT v. Mrs. Sushiladevi S. Agarwal (1994) 50 ITD 524 (Ahd.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Ravi Agricultural Industries (2009) 117 ITD 338 (Agra) (TM)
- Kantilal C. Shah v. Asstt. CIT (2011) 142 TTJ 233 (Ahd. ‘C’)/133 ITD 57 (Ahd.)
- Ravindra Kumar Verma v. CIT (2013) 214 Taxman 117 (Mag.) (All.) (HC)
- Bannalal Jat Constructions (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2019] 106 taxmann.com 128/264 Taxman 5 (SC)
- Principal CIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd. [2018] 94 taxmann.com 115/256 Taxman 63 (SC)
- Principal CIT v. Manoj Hora [2017] 88 taxmann.com 923 (Delhi)
- CIT v. Dilbagh Rai Arora [2019] 104 taxmann.com 371/263 Taxman 30 (All.)
13.10 No addition on the basis of dumb documents
- Amar Natvarlal Shah v. Asstt. CIT (1997) 60 ITD 560 (Ahd.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Shailesh S. Shah (1997) 63 ITD 153 (Bom.)
- Brijlal Rupchand v. ITO (1991) 40 TTJ (Indore) 668
- Malabar Oil Marketing Co. v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 91 TTJ (Mum.) 348
- D.D. Malhan v. Dy. CIT (2004) 91 TTJ (Del.) 947
- Addl. CIT v. Prasant Ahluwalia (2005) 92 TTJ (Ctk.) 464
- Smt. Bommana Swarna Rekha v. Asstt. CIT (2005) 94 TTJ (Visakha.) 885
- Bansal Strips (P) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 99 ITD 177 (Del.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Satyapal Wassan [2007] 295 ITR 352 (AT) (Jab.)
- Nirmal Fashions (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2009) 23 DTR 386 (Kol.)(Trib.)/123 TTJ 180 (Kol.)
- CIT v. Girish Chaudhary (2008) 296 ITR 619 (Del.)
- Chander Mohan Mehta v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 71 ITD 245 (Pune)
- CIT v. D.K. Gupta (2009) 308 ITR 230 (Del.)
- T.S. Venkatesan v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 174 ITD 298 (Cal.)
13.11 On the basis of evidence of specific period, extrapolation of income for the entire search years not sustainable
- Dy. CIT v. Royal Marwar Tobacco Product Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 120 TTJ (Ahd.) 387
- ITO v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das (1964) 52 ITR 335 (SC)
- Instalment Supply (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India AIR 1962 SC 53
- K. Sadasiva Krishna Rao v. CIT (1983) 144 ITR 270 (AP)
- CIT v. Mahesh Chand (1993) 199 ITR 247 (All.)
- Asstt. CIT v. M.M. Sales Agencies [2006] 97 TTJ 575 (Jp)
- Dr. S. Surendranath Reddy v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 72 ITD 205 (Hyd.)
- Samrat Beer Bar v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 75 ITD 19 (Pune) (TM)
- D.N. Kamani (HUF) v. Dy. CIT (1999) 70 ITD 77 (TM) (Pat.)
- Sunny Jacob Jewellers and Wedding Centre v. DCIT (2014) 362 ITR 664/102 DTR 68/267 CTR 361 (Ker.)(HC)
13.12 No addition on estimated/ad hoc basis
- Asstt. CIT v. Radhey Shyam Poddar (HUF) (2004) 86 TTJ (Asr.) 558
- Asstt. CIT v. Nitin Mukesh Mathur (2004) 88 TTJ (Mum.) 220/(2002) 83 ITD 641 (Mum.)
- Bajrang Lal Bansal v. Dy. CIT (2005) CIT 94 TTJ (Del.) 1071
- CIT v. C.L. Khatri (2005) 197 CTR (MP) 44/(2006) 282 ITR 97 (MP)
- Jagdish Duggal v. Asstt. CIT (2009) 24 DTR (Chd.) (Trib.) 174
- Sukh Ram v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 99 ITD 227 (Ahd.)
- Anand Autoride Ltd. v. Jt. CIT (2006) 99 ITD 227 (Ahd.)
- Kantilal Prabhudas Patel v. Dy. CIT (2005) 93 ITD 117 (Indore) (TM)
- Smt. Rajrani Gupta v. Dy. CIT (2000) 72 ITD 155 (Mum.)
- Dr. R.M.L. Mehrotra v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 64 TTJ (All.) 259/68 ITD 288 (All.)
- Smt. Purnima Beri v. Dy. CIT (2003) 264 ITR 54 (Asr.) (TM)
- ITO v. Vijay Kumar Khandelwal (1994) 50 TTJ (Jp.) 11/50 ITD 405 (Jp.)
- ITO v. Gurubachasingh J. Juneja (1996) 54 TTJ (Ahd.) (TM) 1/55 ITD 75 (Ahd.)(TM)
- Mansukhlal Ratanlal Jain (Chopra) v. Union of India (2008) 300 ITR 98 (MP)
- CIT v. Manoj Jain (2006) 287 ITR 285 (Del.)
- Mrs. Deepa Bhatia v. Asstt. CIT (2011) 139 TTJ (Del ‘B’) 329
13.13 Whether deduction can be claimed for unrecorded business expenditure
- Elite Developers v. Dy. CIT (2000) 73 ITD 379 (Nag.)
- Dhanvarsha Builders & Developers P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2006) 102 ITD 375 (Pune)
13.14 No addition on the basis of newspapers, diaries unless corroborated or suggesting undisclosed income of the assessee
- Amarjit Singh Bakshi (HUF) v. Asstt. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 75 (Del.)
- Pooja Bhatt v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 73 ITD 205 (Mum.)
- Associated Stone Industries Kotah Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (1999) 64 TTJ (Jp.) 708/68 ITD 312 (Jp.)
- Atul Kumar Jain v. Dy. CIT (1999) 64 TTJ (Delhi) 786
- Daulat Ram v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 63 TTJ (Del.) 436
- S.K. Gupta v. Dy. CIT (1999) 63 TTJ (Del.) 532
- Essem Intra Port Services P. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 72 ITD 228 (Hyd.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Prabhat Oil Mills (1995) 52 TTJ (Ahd.) 533
- CIT v. Multi Tech Auto Ltd. (2008) 301 ITR 73 (Jharkhand)
- CIT v. Khazan Singh & Bros (2008) 304 ITR 243 (P&H)
- CIT v. Vivek Aggarwal (2015) 121 DTR 241 (Del.)(HC)
- CIT v. Home Developers (P.) Ltd. (2015) 117 DTR 248 (Del.) (HC)
- P. Madhurajan (HUF) v. ACIT (2015) 373 ITR 630 (Mad.)(HC)
- CIT v. Jalaj Batra (2015) 372 ITR 622 (Bom.)(HC)
13.15 Burden of proof
- Surendra M. Khandar v. Asstt. CIT (2001) 76 ITD 121 (Mum.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Sweety Traders (2007) 105 ITD 45 (Chd.)
- CIT v. N. Swamy (2000) 241 ITR 363 (Mad.)
- G.G. Films v. ITO (1993) 45 TTJ (Coch.) 644
- K. Hari Prasad v. IAC (1995) 52 ITD 563 (Hyd.)
- CIT v. Mussadilal Ram Bharose (1987) 165 ITR 14 (SC)
- Chuharmal v. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC)
- Bafakyh Export House v. ITO (1995) 53 TTJ (Coch.) 293
- Dilip N. Shroff v. Jt. CIT (2007) 291 ITR 519 (SC)
- Venkataswami Naidu & Co. v. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 594 (SC)
- Janki Ram Bahadur Ram v. CIT (1965) 57 ITR 21 (SC)
- Saroj Kumar Majumdar v. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 242 (SC)
- CIT v. Premji Gopalbhai (1978) 113 ITR 785 (Guj.)
- ITO v. Ratnesh Kumari (Rani) (1980) 123 ITR 343 (All.)
- Abubucker Sait (Janab) v. CIT (1962) 45 ITR 37 (Mad.)
- CIT v. Raunaq Singh Swaran Singh (1972) 85 ITR 220 (Del.)
- Dalmia Cement Ltd. v. CIT (1976) 105 ITR 633 (SC)
- Virani v. CIT (1973) 90 ITR 255 (Guj.)
- Deep Chandra & Co. v. CIT (1977) 107 ITR 716 (All.)
- Lalit Ram Mangilal of Cawnpore v. CIT (1930) 1 ITR 286 (All.)
13.16 Defect in issue of notice for filing returns
- Dr. R.M.L Mehrotra v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 64 TTJ (All.) 259/68 ITD 288 (All.)
- VVS Alloys Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2000) 68 TTJ (All.) 516
13.17 Addition on account of inadequate household expenditure
- Microland Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 63 TTJ (Bang.) 701/67 ITD 446 (Bang.)
- Dhanvarsha Builders & Developers P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2006) 102 ITD 375 (Pune)
- Eagle Seeds & Biotech Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 100 ITD 301 (Indore)
- Manharlal C. Soni v. CIT (1995) 127 CTR (Guj.) 230/(1995) 215 ITR 634 (Guj.)
- Basana Rani Saha v. ITO (1990) 37 TTJ (Gau.) 188/33 ITD 574 (Gau.)
- CIT v. Guru Bachhan Singh J. Juneja (2008) 302 ITR 63 (Guj.)
- CIT v. Rameshwar Lal Ahuja (2009) 312 ITR 217 (P&H)
13.18 Addition for difference in stock
- ITO v. Jewels Emporium (1994) 48 ITD 164 (Ind.)
- CIT v. Hindustan Mills & Electrical Stores (1998) 232 ITR 421 (MP)
- Giggles (P) Ltd. v. ITO (1992) 43 ITD 388 (Del.)
- Jai Sharda Rice Mills v. ITO (1991) 36 ITD 254 (Asr.)
- ITO v. Shyam Sunder Dhoot (1986) 17 ITD 274 (Jp.)
- CIT v. Veerdip Rollers P. Ltd. (2008) 307 ITR 3 (SC)
13.19 Addition in the year to which incriminating material belongs
- Principal CIT v. Jayant K. Furnishers [2019] 109 taxmann.com 52/266 Taxman 91 (SC)
13.20 Addition under section 68 during search cases
- Satyapal Wassan v. ITO (1991) 39 TTJ (Jab.) 72
- Kantilal & Bros. v. Asstt. CIT (1995) 52 ITD 412 (Trib.) (Pune)
- K. Hari Prasad v. IAC (1995) 52 ITD 563 (Hyd.)
- Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC)
13.21 Addition under section 69 during search cases
- Kewal G. Bajaj v. Asstt. CIT (1999) 71 ITD 375 (Mum.)(SMC)
- Manoj Aggarwal v. Dy. CIT (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del.) (SB)
- Vinod Behari Jain v. ITO (2008) 306 ITR (AT) 392 (Del.)/(2009) 117 ITD 220 (Del.)
13.22 Delay in supplying copies of seized material – Levy of interest not justified
- Bachchubhai S. Antrolia v. Asstt. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 57 (Rajkot)(AT)
14. Penalties & Prosecution in Search Cases
14.1 Levy of penalty in case of agreed addition during assessment
- M.S. Mohammad Marzook v. ITO (2006) 283 ITR 254 (Mad.)
- CIT v. Dharam Chand (1993) 204 ITR 462 (Bom.)
- ITO v. Akshay Bhandar (1989) 33 ITD 13 (Gau.)
- Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (1973) 91 ITR 18 (SC)
14.2 Declaration of undisclosed income during search – Requirement regarding specifying and substantiating the manner
- Hissaria Brothers v. Dy. CIT (2009) 31 DTR 223 (Jd.)/(2009) 126 TTJ (Jd) 391
- Mahendra Chimanlal Shah v. Asstt. CIT (1994) 49 TTJ (Ahd.) 677/(1994) 51 ITD 244 (Ahd.)
- CIT v. Radha Kishan Goel (2005) 278 ITR 454 (All.)
- CIT v. Mahendra C. Shah (2008) 215 CTR (Guj.) 493/(2008) 299 ITR 305 (Guj.)
14.3 Payment of tax and interest relating to undisclosed income
- Ashok Kumar Gupta v. CIT (2006) 287 ITR 376/157 Taxman 339 (P&H)
- CIT v. Nem Kumar Jain (2006) 151 Taxman 187 (All.)/(2006) 202 CTR 328 (All.)
- Gebilal Kanhaialal (HUF) v. Asstt. CIT (2004) 270 ITR 523/(2005) 143 Taxman 42 (Raj.)
14.4 Declaration of undisclosed income for earlier years
- CIT v. Punjab Tyres (1986) 162 ITR 517 (MP)
- CIT v. Suresh Chandra Mittal (2001) 251 ITR 9 (SC)
- CIT v. Suresh Chandra Mittal (2000) 241 ITR 124 (MP)
- CIT v. Rajiv Garg (2009) 313 ITR 256 (P&H)
14.5 Declaration of undisclosed income for earlier years made subject to no penalty
- CIT v. D.K.B. & Co. (2000) 243 ITR 618 (Ker.)
- CIT v. Rakesh Suri (2010) 233 CTR (All.) 184/(2011) 331 ITR 458 (All.)
- Bhagat & Co. v. Asstt. CIT (2006) 101 TTJ (Mum.) 553
- Addl. CIT v. Prem Chand Garg (2009) 31 SOT 97 (Del.)(TM)/(2009) 119 ITD 97 (Del.) (TM)
- Asstt. CIT v. Indica Exports (2010) 129 TTJ (Del.) 269/(2010) 5 ITR 347 (Del.)(AT)
- Trivium Power Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (2010) 133 TTJ (Del.) 438
- Sir Shadi Lal Sugar & General Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1987) 168 ITR 705 (SC)
- K.P. Madhusudhanan v. CIT (2001) 251 ITR 99 (SC)
14.6 Penalty in case of revision of return after search having taken place
- CIT v. Shyam Lal M. Soni (2005) 144 Taxman 666 (MP)/(2005) 276 ITR 156 (MP)
- Dy. CIT v. S. Kumar (2008) 15 DTR 34 (Bang.)/(2009) 120 ITD 201 (Bang.)
- CIT v. Suresh Chand Bansal (2009) 22 DTR 1 (Cal.)/(2010) 329 ITR 1 (Cal.)
- Dy. CIT v. K. Natarajan (2010) 34 DTR 414 (Bang.)/(2010) 128 TTJ (Bang.) 558
- Asstt. CIT v. Rupesh Bholidas Patel (2008) 16 DTR 369 (Ahd.)
- Dy. CIT v. Omkareshwar R. Kalantri (2010) 42 DTR 489 (Pune)
- CIT v. A. Sreenivasa Pai (2000) 242 ITR 29 (Ker.)
14.7 Penalty under section 271AAA not applicable in case of requisition under section 132A
- Vinod Goyal v. Asstt. CIT (2008) 115 TTJ (Nag.) 559/(2008) 6 DTR 23 (Nag.)
- CIT v. Aboo Mohmed (2001) 250 ITR 313/(2000) 111 Taxman 120 (Kar.)
- Principal CIT v. Smt. Ritu Singhal [2018] 92 taxmann.com 224 (Delhi)
- Principal CIT v. Mukeshbhai Raman-lal Prajapati 398 ITR 170 (Guj.)
- Principal CIT v. Phoenix Mills Ltd. 175 DTR 433/307 CTR 700 (Bom).
- Duraipandi & S. Thalavaipandian AOP v. Asstt. CIT [2019] 106 taxmann.com 20 (Mad.)
- Asstt. CIT v. Gebilal Kanhaia-lal (HUF) [2012] 25 taxmann.com 214/210 Taxman 24 (SC)
- Principal CIT v. Surinder Kumar Khindri [2017] 88 taxmann.com 673 (Punj. & Har.)
14.8 Attraction of penalty for concealment in cases covered u/s 153C
- Principal CIT v. Rajkumar Gulab Badgujar 111 taxmann.com 257/267 Taxman 488 (SC)
15. Application to Settlement Commission in Search Cases
15.1 No power with the settlement commission to grant waiver from levy of interest
- CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (2001) 252 ITR 1 (SC)
- Brij Lal v. CIT (2010) 235 CTR (SC) 417/328 ITR 477 (SC)
15.2 Order of settlement commission not appealable
- R.B. Shree Ram Durga Prasad and Fateh Chand Narsing Das v. Settlement Commission (1989) 176 ITR 169/43 Taxman 34 (SC)
- N. Krishnan v. Settlement Commission (1989) 180 ITR 585/47 Taxman 294 (Kar.)
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied