← All Phrases

“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
86
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
66
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
59
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

Badrinath Sales Private Limited, Adityapur, West Singhbhum vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle 1 Jsr, Jamshedpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/RAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

iron and steel. For the assessment year 2011-12, it filed its return of income declaring total income of 21,14,389. A survey under section 133A was conducted on 22.03.2018 at the business premises of the assessee. During the course of survey, it was noticed that the registered office

Kanti Lal Agrawal, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-1(2), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 33/RPR/2026[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Raipur10 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.33/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Kanti Lal Agrawal House No.101, Goyal Bandhu, Kurra, Dharsiwa, Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Afepa0699G

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Agrawal Agro (Rs.84,87,500), M/s Kesharwani Rice Mill (Rs.29,95,000), and M/s Shri Hanuman Food Products (Rs.27,25,000). A survey under section 133A of the Act on 15.03.2016 at premises of brokers/entry providers like Shri Sanjay Sharma and Shri Kamlesh Kesharwani revealed a nexus issuing fake bills

Ekesh Gaurang Desai, Mumbai vs. Central Circle - 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6116/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarekesh Gaurang Desai Vs Acit Central Circle -1(1), Mumbai C-46, Pandurang Chs, A.B. 321, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nair Road Near Juhu Post Mumbai 400020 Office, Juhu Mumbai-400049 Pan:Aibpd4569L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dharangandhi, Adv & Ms. Vinita Nara Adv Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra (Cit Dr) Date Of Hearing : 29/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10/02/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (Jm): The Instant Appeal Of The Assessee Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)-47, Mumbai [For Brevity ‘The Ld. Cit(A)’], Order Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (For Brevity ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2011-12, Date Of Order 28.07.2025. The Impugned Order Emanated From The Order Of The Ld. Income-Tax Officer Ward-22(1)(2), Mumbai

For Appellant: Shri DharanGandhi, Adv & Ms. Vinita Nara AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

from the facts that the cash of ₹1 crore seized from the assessee belonged to Mr. Anand Nair. The Department carried out a survey under section 133A on Mr. Anand Nair on 13.03.2013. During the course of the survey proceedings, Mr. Anand Nair disclosed substantial income, as evident from

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Third Floor vs. Rama Shankar Khemka, Ganesh Bazar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1005/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under 26 Khemka Group 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 valuable

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Third Floor vs. Rajesh Rani Khemka, Ganesh Bazar

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1004/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under 26 Khemka Group 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 valuable

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Income Tax Department vs. Pmk Impex Private Limited, Atma Ram House

ITA 1002/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘A': NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI

DCIT, Central Circle-6, Income Tax Department vs. Payal Khemka, K

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmandcit Vs. Payal Khemka Central Circle- 6 67/85-2 Jhun Bhawan, Natimalivaranashi Delhi Uttar Pradesh 221001 (Pan: Adtpj2728A) Dcit Vs. Pmk Impex Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle- 6 1 Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, Delhi New Delhi, Delhi 110001

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Jitender Singh, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search under 26 Khemka Group 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 valuable

M/S Eklavya Estate Pvt.Ltd., Ranchi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ranchi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 258/RAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahaym/S Eklavya Estate Pvt. Ltd., D.C.I.T., H-95, Harmu Housing Colony, Central Circle-2, Vs. Ranchi-834002 (Jharkhand) Ranchi. Pan No. Aabce 5815 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 133ASection 270ASection 274

facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private limited unlisted company, engaged in the real estate business. Survey under section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) was conducted in the case of assessee on 31/01/2018 at its business premises

Supriya Roy, Agartala vs. ITO, Ward-1, Agartala

ITA 101/GTY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am (Through : Virtual Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.101/Gty/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year 2018-2019) Vs. Ito Ward-1, Agartala Supriya Roy, Ram Thakur Trading, Central Road, Agartala, Tripura-799001 Pan No.: Acbpr 7501 G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Mody, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2026 आदेश / Order Per George Mathan, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Id. Addl./Jcit(A)-2, Chennai, Dated 13.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. At The Time Of Hearing The Ld.Ar Drew Our Attention To Pages 9 To 16 Of The Paper Book Which Was Copy Of The Written Submission Filed. The Same Reads As Follows:- 2

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mody, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 69A

Case Laws relied upon: Facts of the case: The assessee-individual is engaged in the business of trading in Mustard Oil. A survey under section 133A of the I. T. Act, 1961 (Act) was conducted in the business premises of the assessee on 21.03.2018. During the course of survey physical ... oath cannot be relied as evidence. The Hon'ble Tribunal has held, to quote: "3.8 Effect of admission made in statements recorded during survey under section 133A of the Act 18. The position of law regarding the evidentiary value of admissions made in such statements is now settled. After considering

Uttam Kumar Reddy Korupol, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 770/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 69

ITA No 765 769 and 770 of 2025 Laxma Reddy Korpolu and others आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE

Leela Reddy Korupol, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 769/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) was carried out in the case of the assessee on 27.09.2019. On the same date, a survey under section 133A of the Act was also conducted at the business premises of the firm. Certain documents were impounded from the business premises of the firm

Laxma Reddy Korpolu, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 765/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: CA Shri C Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) was carried out in the case of the assessee on 27.09.2019. On the same date, a survey under section 133A of the Act was also conducted at the business premises of the firm. Certain documents were impounded from the business premises of the firm

Ruby Singh, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-8, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4772/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year 2017-18 Ms. Ruby Singh, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of R-543, New Rajendra Nagar, Income Tax, New Delhi: 1100 60 Central Circle 8, Pan No. Anaps3827J New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mahir Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 274Section 68

assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a sole proprietor of M/s. Moonage Films. Survey under Section 133A of the Act was conducted on 11.09.2020 by the Investigation Wing in the case of M/s. SLG Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kirti India Hospitality

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1 Noida, Noida vs. Ms. Radhika Mehra, Legal Heir of Late Sapna Mehra, Noida

ITA 3567/DEL/2025[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 68

Revenue brought to our notice relevant facts on record and submitted that during assessment proceedings, the AO observed that a survey under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') was conducted on 18.03.2017. During the year under consideration, assessee has declared income and the same

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8364/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

events, which has a direct bearing both on the assumption of jurisdiction as well as on the merits of the addition: - 14.01.2017: Survey under section 133A conducted in the case of Shri Bijal Shah, proprietor of M/s Swastik Corporation. 20 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8363/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

events, which has a direct bearing both on the assumption of jurisdiction as well as on the merits of the addition: - 14.01.2017: Survey under section 133A conducted in the case of Shri Bijal Shah, proprietor of M/s Swastik Corporation. 20 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8362/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

events, which has a direct bearing both on the assumption of jurisdiction as well as on the merits of the addition: - 14.01.2017: Survey under section 133A conducted in the case of Shri Bijal Shah, proprietor of M/s Swastik Corporation. 20 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers

Jamnadas Virji Shares and Stock Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, 4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are

ITA 8361/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

Section 10(34)Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 37(1)

events, which has a direct bearing both on the assumption of jurisdiction as well as on the merits of the addition: - 14.01.2017: Survey under section 133A conducted in the case of Shri Bijal Shah, proprietor of M/s Swastik Corporation. 20 ITA No. 8361 to 8364/Mum/2025 Jamnadas Virji Shares & Stock Brokers

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT
Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

misplaced. She submits that the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment based on fresh tangible material obtained during survey under section 133A of the Act on 10 I.T.A. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 25.02.2019, wherein, Shri V. Rajendran, Chairman of the assessee Trust stated on oath that the Trust’s activities were limited ... referred to the statement of Chairman of the assessee trust and argued that he himself admitted on oath a statement recorded during survey under section 133A of the Act on 25.02.2019 stating that the trust activities were limited to sale of books, notebooks and uniforms, which clearly supports the items

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2014-15,

ITA 1669/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

misplaced. She submits that the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment based on fresh tangible material obtained during survey under section 133A of the Act on 10 ITA. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 25.02.2019, wherein, Shri V. Rajendran, Chairman of the assessee Trust stated on oath that the Trust’s activities were limited ... referred to the statement of Chairman of the assessee trust and argued that he himself admitted on oath a statement recorded during survey under section 133A of the Act on 25.02.2019 stating that the trust activities were limited to sale of books, notebooks and uniforms, which clearly supports the items