https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387429 The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make additions under section 153A/143(3) without incriminating material found during the search. It ruled that additions for share capital and share premium under section 68 were not valid without incriminating evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of incriminating material for search assessments and followed consistent judicial precedents requiring such evidence. As a result, the AO's additions were deemed unsustainable, and the CIT(A)'s decision to delete them was upheld, leading to the dismissal of Revenue's appeals and the assessee's cross-objections. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387429 The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make additions under section 153A/143(3) without incriminating material found during the search. It ruled that additions for share capital and share premium under section 68 were not valid without incriminating evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of incriminating material for search assessments and followed consistent judicial precedents requiring such evidence. As a result, the AO's additions were deemed unsustainable, and the CIT(A)'s decision to delete them was upheld, leading to the dismissal of Revenue's appeals and the assessee's cross-objections. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387429