Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2018 (12) TMI 1063 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal quashes Income Tax Act proceedings, deletes Assessing Officer's addition, Assessee's appeal allowed The Tribunal quashed the proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act and deleted the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer. The appeal of ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal quashes Income Tax Act proceedings, deletes Assessing Officer's addition, Assessee's appeal allowed

                            The Tribunal quashed the proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act and deleted the entire addition made by the Assessing Officer. The appeal of the Assessee was allowed, and the Orders of the authorities below were set aside.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Validity of proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act.
                            2. Addition on merits based on alleged cash transactions.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Validity of Proceedings under Section 153C:
                            The primary issue in this case is the validity of the proceedings initiated under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The Assessee contended that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) erred in assuming jurisdiction under Section 153C by serving a vague and non-speaking notice, and that no incriminating material was seized in relation to the Assessee. The Assessee argued that no satisfaction had been recorded by the A.O. of the person searched, and no documents had been handed over by the A.O. of the person searched to the A.O. of the Assessee-company.

                            The Tribunal noted that the satisfaction note under Section 153C was recorded in the case of the Assessee and not in the case of the person searched, which is a mandatory requirement. The Tribunal referred to various judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manish Maheshwari vs. ACIT, which mandates that the satisfaction must be recorded by the A.O. of the person searched. The Tribunal also referred to the CBDT Circular No. 24/2015, which clarifies that even if the A.O. of the searched person and the other person is the same, a satisfaction note must be recorded in the file of the person searched.

                            The Tribunal found that no such satisfaction note was recorded in the case of the person searched (Mahesh Mehta group of cases). The Tribunal also observed that the documents seized (BAHIs and sale deed) did not belong to the Assessee but to the vendor/seller. Therefore, the initiation of proceedings under Section 153C was held to be invalid and bad in law.

                            2. Addition on Merits Based on Alleged Cash Transactions:
                            On the merits of the addition, the A.O. made an addition of Rs. 3,55,91,000/- on account of alleged cash payment made by the Assessee to Mahesh Mehta group of companies for the purchase of a property. The A.O. also made an addition of Rs. 3,55,910/- on account of 1% brokerage charges. The Assessee contended that no evidence was found to support the addition, and the statement of Mahesh Mehta was not admissible as it had no evidentiary value.

                            The Tribunal noted that the statement of Mahesh Mehta was retracted, and he denied meeting any of the Directors of the Assessee-company. The Tribunal also observed that the person who authored the BAHIs was not produced for cross-examination. The Tribunal found that no incriminating material was seized during the search, and the A.O. failed to prove the payment of cash over and above what was recorded in the sale deed.

                            The Tribunal referred to various judicial precedents, including the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., which held that documents found in the possession of the seller do not belong to the purchaser. The Tribunal concluded that there was no justification for the addition made by the A.O. and deleted the entire addition.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal quashed the proceedings under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act and deleted the entire addition made by the A.O. The appeal of the Assessee was allowed, and the Orders of the authorities below were set aside.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found