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 :

        2022 (4) TMI 491 - 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 overturns Assessing Officer's additions without incriminating evidence. Settlement Commission disclosures not admissible for additions. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the additions made by the Assessing Officer without incriminating evidence found during the search were not ...
                      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 overturns Assessing Officer's additions without incriminating evidence. Settlement Commission disclosures not admissible for additions.

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the additions made by the Assessing Officer without incriminating evidence found during the search were not justified. The Tribunal also deleted the addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- based on the disclosure before the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC), emphasizing that such disclosures cannot be used for additions when settlement proceedings fail and no incriminating material is found during the search. The Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions, and ordered their deletion.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Confirmation of additions made by the Assessing Officer without any incriminating evidence found at the time of search.
                          2. Confirmation of the addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- on account of additional income offered in the application filed under section 245D(1) of the Income Tax Act before the Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC).

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Confirmation of Additions Made by the Assessing Officer Without Any Incriminating Evidence Found at the Time of Search:

                          The appellant, Late Shri Sawarmal Hisaria, filed an appeal seeking to set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2013-14. The primary contention was that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) without any incriminating evidence found during the search. The search and seizure operation conducted on the Hisaria Group on 16.11.2017 did not uncover any incriminating material related to the year under consideration. The AO framed the assessment under section 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, based on the search operation, but no incriminating material was found. The Tribunal referenced the decision in the case of Anantnadh Constructions and Farms (P.) Ltd., which held that no addition could be made based on income offered before the ITSC when the settlement was aborted. The Tribunal emphasized that when no incriminating material is found during the search, no addition can be made under section 153A read with section 143(3), as supported by the decisions of the Delhi High Court in Kabul Chawla and the Bombay High Court in Continental Warehousing Corporation.

                          2. Confirmation of the Addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- on Account of Additional Income Offered in the Application Filed Under Section 245D(1) of the Income Tax Act Before the ITSC:

                          The assessee had disclosed additional income of Rs. 25,50,000/- for the assessment year 2013-14 in an application filed before the ITSC. However, the ITSC rejected the application on the grounds that the conditions under section 245C(1) were not fulfilled, and the matter was returned to the AO. The AO made an addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- based on the additional income offered by the assessee before the ITSC. The Tribunal noted that the disclosure before the ITSC was made on an ad-hoc basis to buy peace of mind and avoid litigation. The Tribunal referred to various judicial precedents, including the case of Dolat Investment vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, which held that confidential information disclosed in the application before the ITSC cannot be used by the AO to make additions if the settlement proceedings fail. The Tribunal concluded that the AO could not make additions based solely on the disclosure made before the ITSC, especially when no incriminating material was found during the search. The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made by the AO in the absence of any incriminating material, and the addition was ordered to be deleted.

                          Conclusion:

                          The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, holding that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the AO without any incriminating evidence found during the search. The addition of Rs. 25,50,000/- based on the disclosure before the ITSC was deleted, as no incriminating material was found during the search, and the disclosure was made on an ad-hoc basis. The Tribunal emphasized that additions cannot be made solely based on disclosures before the ITSC when the settlement proceedings fail, and no incriminating material is found during the search.
                          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