Which cases are most cited on Section 134(2)?

Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT (134 ITR 219) — 129 citing judgments; Sri Matha Vividoddesha Pathina Souharda Sahakari Niyamitha v. UOI (134 Taxmann.com 62) — 42 citing judgments; Omega Sports & Radio Works v. CIT (134 ITR 28) — 26 citing judgments; 1. CIT v. Balbirsingh Maini (134 ITD 445) — 11 citing judgments; 531 (SC) 2. DCIT Vs. Shiv Sai Developers, 134 ITD 445 (mum) (2011) 3. Hasmukhlal M. Parikh v. CIT (237 ITR 814) — 10 citing judgments.

How many judgments discuss Section 134(2)?

BharatTax indexes 39 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that discuss Section 134(2) (Section 134(2)).

← All Phrases

“Section 134(2)”

Q: What is the leading case on Section 134(2)?

Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT (134 ITR 219) is the decision most relied on for Section 134(2), cited in 129 judgments on BharatTax. Where an assessee's own funds or interest-free funds exceed the interest-free advances or investments made, no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made, including under Section 14A.

Section References (mined)Section 134Section 134(2)39 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 134(2) is Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT (134 ITR 219), cited in 129 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 134(2)

Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT

134 ITR 219 · 1982 · High Court

129

citing judgments

Where an assessee's own funds or interest-free funds exceed the interest-free advances or investments made, no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made, including under Section 14A.

Sri Matha Vividoddesha Pathina Souharda Sahakari Niyamitha v. UOI

134 Taxmann.com 62 · 2022 · High Court

citing judgments

A society registered under the Karnataka Souharda Sahakari Act, 1997, qualifies as a co-operative society under Section 2(19) and is eligible for deductions under Section 80P.

Omega Sports & Radio Works v. CIT

134 ITR 28 · 1982 · High Court

citing judgments

An issue already concluded by the jurisdictional High Court is not debatable and cannot be rectified under section 154.

1. CIT v. Balbirsingh Maini

134 ITD 445 · ITAT

citing judgments

Advance or earnest money received under a Memorandum of Understanding cannot be treated as income unless the obligations undertaken are completed. The taxability arises only upon completion of the contractual obligations.

531 (SC) 2. DCIT Vs. Shiv Sai Developers, 134 ITD 445 (mum) (2011) 3. Hasmukhlal M. Parikh v. CIT

237 ITR 814 · High Court

citing judgments

The assessee can rely on the determination of 'on money' income by the Tribunal in a related case, even if the current case involves different parties.

Judgments citing Section 134(2)

Anoop Jain HUF, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle - 1, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4043/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2013-14] Ritu Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1 Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aampj9586C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aadpj2136K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2013-14] Anoop Jain Huf Vs Jcit (Osd) No.11, Barbar Lane, Bengali Central Circle-1, Market, New Delhi-110001 Noida Pan-Aaaha6321A Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Tulsian, Adv. & Shri Bhoomija Verma, Adv. Respondent By Shri Mahes Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 Order

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 153A

ITA No.4038/Del/2018 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Anoop Jain, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle - 1, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4042/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 153A

ITA No.4038/Del/2018 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Ritu Jain, Delhi vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), CC - 1, Noida

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4038/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Section 115BSection 127Section 132Section 139Section 142Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 142(3)Section 143(2)Section 153A

ITA No.4038/Del/2018 & Others THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore vs. Ramchandra Naveen, Bangalore

ITA 2083/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(4)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore vs. Ramchandra Naveen, Bangalore

ITA 2082/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 132(4)Section 153A

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle)-1, Raipur vs. M/S. Chhatisgarh Distilleries Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 103/RPR/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.103/Rpr/2020 Co No.15/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central Circle)-1, Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri S.R Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L Anuragi, Ld. CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 132(4)Section 153ASection 69C

Assessing Officer did not proceed further to enquire into the undisclosed income as admitted by the assessee in his statement under section 134(2) in fact situation where during the course of search there was no recovery of assets or cash by the Department. This fact also has not been

Vision Exports, Moradabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Moradabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2361/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2017-18 Vision Exports, Vs Acit, Faridpur, Sambhal Road, Central Circle, Moradabad – 244 001, Moradabad. Uttar Pradesh. Pan: Aajfv0634Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ca; Shri Mohammad Ammar, Ca & Shri Tariq Nafees, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 23.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.06.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.06.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Lucknow-3 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Lucknow-3/10314/2018-19 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 30.12.2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Acit, Central Circle, Moradabad (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 127Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2984/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

ITA 2983/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'ए 'न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH: CHENNΑΙ श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिक

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2981/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2980/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2979/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Chennai vs. Radiance Realty Developers India Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2978/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Radiance Realty Developers India Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2972/CHNY/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Radiance Realty Developers India Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee as

ITA 2971/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Shivanand K Kalakeri, CIT

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40A(3)Section 43C

arrat ates aferacn,'e ars, Fa! IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI Mud A. apf, afte wees

Pradeep Kumar Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle 2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

ITA 1192/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Parth Patni, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 131Section 153CSection 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh

Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Jaipur vs. Shri Pradeep Kumar Dusad, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that

ITA 1149/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Parth Patni, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 131Section 153CSection 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh

DCIT Central, Bhopal vs. Sharad Sharma, Bhopal

ITA 309/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No. 29/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2010-11) It(Ss)A No. 32/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2015-16) Shri Sharad Sharma, Acit, Central, बनाम/ H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior Vs. 74 Bunglows, (Stationed At Bhopal) Tt Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Amzps9791D) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Assessing Officer did not proceed further to enquire into the undisclosed income as admitted by the assessee in his statement under section 134(2) in fact situation where during the course of search, there was no recovery of assets or cash by the Department. This fact also has not been

DCIT Central, Bhopal vs. Sharad Sharma, Bhopal

ITA 304/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Assessing Officer did not proceed further to enquire into the undisclosed income as admitted by the assessee in his statement under section 134(2) in fact situation where during the course of search, there was no recovery of assets or cash by the Department. This fact also has not been

DCIT, Central Circle - 3, Coimbatore vs. Smt.Vanitha Mohan, Coimbatre

In the result, the appeal by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 498/CHNY/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.267/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. Shri D. Vijay Mohan, The Dcit, No.232, Tea Estates, Central Circle-3, Race Course Road, Coimbatore. Coimbatore-641 018. [Pan: Aatpm 1202 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.268/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT

Section 132Section 132(4)

Assessing Officer did not proceed further to enquire into the undisclosed income as admitted by the assessee in his statement under section 134(2) in fact situation where during the course of search, there was no recovery of assets or cash by the Department. This fact also has not been