CIT v. Naresh Kumar Agarwal

53 Taxmann.com 306High Court2015#740 most cited

What is CIT v. Naresh Kumar Agarwal authority for?

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) during a search operation is akin to a statement under Section 162 of Cr.P.C. and cannot be treated as a proven fact or clinching evidence on its own, serving merely as a basis for further investigation.

137

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Naresh Kumar Agarwal · Section 132(4) statement · evidentiary value · search and seizure · not proven fact · 162 Cr.P.C. · voluntary admission · retracted statement · surrender of income

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Naresh Kumar Agarwal

M/S Agroha Ornaments, Gwalior vs. ACIT., Central, Gwalior

ITA 135/AGR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.135/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Agroha Ornaments Acit (Central) बनाम/ Solid Gold Plaza, Sarafa Bazar Gwalior Vs. Lashkar, Gwalior 474011 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abgfa-1001-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.586/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Acit (Central) M/S Agroha Ornaments बनाम/ Gwalior Solid Gold Plaza, Sarafa Bazar Vs. Lashkar, Gwalior 474011 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abgfa-1001-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashok Vijayawargiya (Ca) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Vijayawargiya (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69A

…I) dated 10-03-2003 emphasized the fact the while recording statement during search and seizure, no attempt should be made to obtain confession as to the undisclosed income. 6. The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Naresh Kumar Agarwal (53 Taxmann.com 306), as cited by Ld. AR, held that for all practical purposes, the statement recorded under sub- section (4) of Section 132 of the Act partakes the character of the one recorded by an investigating officer under Section 162 of Cr.P.C. Howsoever desirable, it may appear to be, it cannot be ascribed the status of a proven fact. At the most, it…