Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Notices under Section 153C of Income Tax Act Unwarranted Without Specific Incriminating Material For Assessment Years: Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has quashed numerous notices issued under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, asserting that such notices are untenable in the absence of specific incriminating material directly relating to the assessment years for which reopening was sought. The Court emphasized that a generic invocation of Section 153C for an entire block of ten years, without specific material linked to each year, is legally impermissible.

The judgment focused on the critical requirement for the existence of specific incriminating material directly relating to the assessment years in question to invoke Section 153C. It distinguished the provisions of Section 153A and 153C, noting that while Section 153A mandates issuance of notice post-search for six preceding years leading to abatement of pending assessments, Section 153C necessitates satisfaction regarding the impact of discovered material on total income determination before initiating proceedings.

The batch of writ petitions challenged notices issued under Section 153C for various Assessment Years (AYs), deeming them illegal due to the absence of specific incriminating material for the AYs proposed to be reopened.

Interpretation of Section 153C: The Court held that Section 153C necessitates a satisfaction that material found during search influences total income for specific AYs. Generic invocation for an entire block of ten years without specific material related to each year is impermissible.

Distinguishing Sections 153A and 153C: The procedural mandates and preconditions between these two sections are distinct. Section 153A involves automatic issuance of notice post-search for six preceding years, whereas Section 153C requires specific satisfaction of the impact of discovered material.

Application and Impact of Satisfaction Notes: The necessity for specificity in satisfaction notes was underscored. They must record reasons how material discovered during search influences total income for particular AYs.

The Court quashed the majority of impugned notices under Section 153C due to lack of specific incriminating material linked to the assessment years in question. Exceptions were made in two cases where satisfaction notes adequately specified relevant AYs.

Date of the decision is April 09, 2024.

Saksham Commodities Limited Versus Income Tax Officer Ward 22(1), Delhi & Anr.", and the

Similar News