“survey under section 133A”

Search & SeizureSection 133ASection 133A734 judgments

The decision most relied on for survey under section 133A is CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (352 ITR 480), cited in 581 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on survey under section 133A

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

352 ITR 480 · 2013 · Supreme Court

581

citing judgments

Statements recorded during a survey under Section 133A do not have evidentiary value as Section 133A does not empower examination on oath. Consequently, additions to income cannot be made solely based on such uncorroborated statements without other credible evidence.

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son

300 ITR 157 · 2008 · High Court

452

citing judgments

A statement recorded under duress during a survey, if subsequently retracted, has no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for an income-tax assessment; the assessment should instead rely on audited accounts.

Paul Mathews & Sons. v. CIT

263 ITR 101 · 2003 · High Court

266

citing judgments

A statement recorded under Section 133A of the Income-tax Act has no evidentiary value because Section 133A does not empower an Income-tax Officer to examine any person on oath.

CIT v. SAS Pharmaceuticals

335 ITR 259 · 2011 · High Court

149

citing judgments

No penalty under section 271(1)(c) can be imposed if the amount of tax sought to be evaded is nil under Explanation 4(c), such as when the assessment results in a refund even after an addition to income. The conditions stipulated in the explanations to section 271(1)(c) must be unambiguously met for penalty imposition.

CIT v. Dhingra Metal Works

328 ITR 384 · 2010 · High Court

113

citing judgments

Statements recorded and materials collected during a survey under Section 133A are not made on oath, unlike those under Section 132(4), and thus are not conclusive evidence; an income addition cannot be made solely based on such statements.

Raj Hans Towers (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (

373 ITR 9 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Additions made for amounts surrendered during a search or survey operation are justified if the assessee fails to provide a satisfactory and bona fide explanation for the surrendered amount or to substantiate its retraction.

Bachittar Singh v. CIT

328 ITR 400 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

A statement recorded under section 133A, though not possessing the same evidentiary value as a sworn statement under section 132(4), cannot be considered irrelevant material and can be relied upon, especially when the assessee fails to produce regular books of account.

Bansal v. ACIT

63 Taxmann.com 199 · 2015 · ITAT

citing judgments

A statement made or income surrendered during search or survey proceedings, especially if later retracted, requires corroborating evidence to form the basis of an assessment, aligning with CBDT instructions to focus on evidence collection rather than confessions.

Judgments citing survey under section 133A

DCIT(CC)-8(3), Mumbai vs. Mehta Emporium Jewellers, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2830/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2830/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year :2019-20) Deputy Commissioner V/S. Mehta Emporium Of Income Tax- Central बिधम Jewellers Circle 8(3), Mumbai 101, Mehta Arch, S.V. Road, Room No. 656, 6Th Floor, Opp. Natraj Market, Malad Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. (West), Mumbai 400064 Road, Mumbai 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aalfm2962N Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: Shri. Devendra Jain रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri. R.A. Dhyani, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri. Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri. R.A. Dhyani, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292CSection 69A

thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132 or survey under section 133A, it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed – (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Muzaffarpur vs. Nandkumar Prasad Sah, Saraiyganj Road, Muzaffarpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 248/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna failed to appreciate that search u/s 132 in the residential premises and survey under section 133A in the business premises of the assessee were conducted simultaneously on 17.09.2020 and therefore, inter linked which implies that the documents marked as GDMIS ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Patna failed to appreciate that survey under section 133A was a consequential proceedings of search operation u/s 132 and assessment proceedings under two different sections cannot be initiated in case of a single assessee

Shankar Lal Ludhani Through Lata Devi Ludhani As Legal Heir, Ajmer vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 406/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sogani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 115BSection 133ASection 147Section 148Section 271A

period, the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.2,07,20,000/- in the bank account of M/s Vaishali Enterprises. Upon conducting a survey under Section 133A, it was discovered that the assessee had made abnormal cash sales on 08.11.2016 However, the assessee failed to provide a satisfactory explanation regarding ... dated 28.03.2022 levying a penalty of Rs. 1,62,000.00. The brief facts of the case are as under: A survey under section 133A of the IT Act, 1961 was carried out on the assessee's business premises on 12.02.2018. During the survey proceedings the assessee surrendered an amount

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax -19(3), Mumbai vs. Sanjay Prakashmal Jain, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2992/MUM/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 68

assessee. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue supported the order of assessing officer. The ld. Sr. DR submits that a survey under section 133A was conducted on the business premises of Basant Jain who was engaged in providing accommodation entry. In the statement recorded by Investigation Wing, Basant Jain ... Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee supported the order of ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR of the assessee submits that a survey under section 133A was carried out in case of Basant D Jain on 09.07.2008. The assessment of Basant Jain was completed under section

ACIT, Allahabad vs. Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/ALLD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

appearing at page 6 to 10 of the order for making the said arbitrary addition, which are reproduced as under:- "That a survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act was conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 05.11.98 where various stock was found. It was found

M/S Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar, Allahabad vs. Jt.CIT, Allahabad

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 379/ALLD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 153A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur vs. M/S. Habib Tannery Private Limited, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the Department stands dismissed

ITA 564/LKW/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2015-16 Dy. Commissioner Of Income V. M/S Habib Tannery Pvt. Ltd. Tax-6 15-B, 150 Ft. Road Kanpur Jajmau, Kanpur Tan/Pan:Aach4129E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri H. S. Usmani, Cit (Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H. S. Usmani, CIT (DR)

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

return of income for the year under consideration on 23.09.2015, declaring a total income of Rs.12,69,300/-. In this case, a survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) was conducted on 18.02.2015 at the premises of the assessee. During the course

The District Mining Officer, Bareilly vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bareilly

ITA 246/LKW/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 133ASection 206CSection 250

sufficient grounds to condone the delay. Therefore, the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The facts of the case are that a survey under section 133A was conducted at the office premises of the Director of the Geology and Mining at Khaniz Bhawan in Lucknow on 4.03.2015. During the said

Jypore Manufacturing Jewellers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 432/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

against gross profit rate of 46.98% disclosed on turnover of Rs.3,94,78,934/-. In the case of the assessee company, a survey under section 133A of the Act was also conducted on 09.3.2018. While survey, excess cash and excess stock were found. 3.1 Record reveals that cash of Rs.17 ... incorporated on 04/09/1997. In this regard, a copy of memorandum of association and articles of association is available on Paper Book Page No.1-23. Survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried out at the business premises of the assessee company on 09/03/2018. The assessee filed return

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Malbros International Pvt Ltd, Faridkot

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections

ITA 993/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Tribunal is right in law in holding that the statement made during a survey under section 133A of the income-tax Act has no evidentiary value ? ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Tribunal ... proceeding under this Act, as already extracted above, makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under Section 133A are not conclusive piece of evidence by itself. For all these reasons, particularly, when the Commissioner and the Tribunal followed the circular of the Central

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Malbros International Pvt Ltd, Faridkot

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 992/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The Dcit, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2016-17 Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Vs Central Circle-2, Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Ludhiana. Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

Om Parkash Singla, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Faridabad

ITA 717/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountant Memebr

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

Sohan Lal Singla AOP were making payment to M/s Alfa India against outstanding purchase obligation of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited (JIL). Subsequently, a survey under Section 133A was conducted at different premises of M/s Jagatjit Industries Limited, as it was found in the initial enquiry that the receipts

Om Parkash Singla, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Faridabad

ITA 716/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountant Memebr

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

Om Parkash Singla, Faridabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-1, Faridabad

ITA 715/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Manish Agarwal, Accountant Memebr

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

Life Care Hospital, Sirohi vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 938/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 250Section 69A

manual scrutiny. Further para 1(ii) of instruction no. 4/2018 dated 20.08.2018 issued by CBDT is reproduced herewith for your reference. “ Casespertaining to Survey under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) excluding those cases where books of account, documents etc. were not impounded and returned income (excluding ... Gopal Rastogi vs. CIT (2022) 142 Taxmann.com 142” wherein it was held that “Where there is no impounding of books of account during survey under section 133A and returned income of assessee for year under consideration is not less than returned income of immediately preceding year then case would

Manoj Kumar Khubani, Barmer vs. Dc Cen Cir 2 Jdh, Jodhpur

In the result, stands ALLOWED

ITA 376/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur24 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 250

useful for or relevant to any proceeding under this Act’ makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive piece of evidence by themselves. The statement obtained u/s 133A would not automatically bind upon the assessee. Section 133A does ... useful for or relevant to any proceeding under this Act’ makes it clear that the materials collected and the statement recorded during the survey under section 133A are not conclusive piece of evidence by themselves. The statement obtained u/s 133A would not automatically bind upon the assessee. Section 133A does

Hemkunt Foundations, Gurugram vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central) -1, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed and the Stay

ITA 631/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2021-22 & Stay Application No.329Del/2024 ( In Ita No. 631/Del/2024 ) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Hemkunt Foundations, Vs. Principal Commissioner Plot No.809, Second Floor, Income Tax, Rd 42, Sector 42, Central-1, Gurugram, Haryana New Delhi Pin: 122 002 Pan No. Aaath8443C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Salil Kapoor, SumitFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Agarwal, Special Counsel and Shivansh Pandya, Jr. Standing

Section 12ASection 133ASection 143(2)Section 80G

vide registration No. DIT(E)/12A/2011-12/H-827/33 granted by Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi. 3. A survey under Section 133A of Act was conducted by Investigation Wing of Income Tax Department at Delhi on 10.09.2021 at the following two premises of the assessee: (i) Plot No. 809, 2nd Floor

Shri Bharatkumar Iashwarbhai Bhatiya, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (1) (2), Rajkot

ITA 46/RJT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

thing are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under section 132 [or survey under section 133A], it may, in any proceeding under this Act, be presumed (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other

Shri Bharatkumar Iashwarbhai Bhatiya, Rajkot vs. The ITO, Ward-1 (1) (2), Rajkot

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

ITA 45/RJT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinha

Shri Bharatkumar Iashwarbhai Bhatiya, Rajkot vs. The ACIT, Central Cirl-1, Rajkot

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue, in ITA No

ITA 44/RJT/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Jun 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 134 & 135/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08 & 2008-09) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Shri Kherajmal Lekhrajbjai 5Th 1(2)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Thavrani, 4- Parsana Nagar, Shri Vs. Floor, Room No. 517, Race Vaheguru Grupa, Near Refugee Course Ring Road, Rajkot-360 Colony, Rajkot-360 001 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Adrpt 5807 E (Appellant) (Respondent)