← All Phrases

“Section 132(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 132Section 132(3)86 judgments

AMOLAK SINGH BHATIA,BILASPUR vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-08, DELHI

ITA 3502/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt, CIT DR
Section 127Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 153DSection 246

Raipur 27.02.2020 01.03.2020 Temporarily closed. And Prohibitory order u/s 132(3) was passed on 01.03.2020. 15-21 2. The prohibitory order passed under section 132(3) on 01.03.2020 in respect of the wooden almirah was lifted by the DDIT, Unit 1(4), New Delhi, on 20.11.2020, and the statement ... issued without recording any reasons regarding the impracticability of seizing the loose sheets at the time of its passing, as mandated under section 132(3) of the Act. A perusal of the prohibitory order, annexed at page no. 17 of the paper book, clearly shows that no reasons have been

ANIL KUMAR JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, JHANDEWALAN, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 475/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

made on account of alleged bogus unsecured loan under Section 690 on the basis of third party statement under Section 132(3) recorded during search without any corroborative evidence. 34. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BENGALURU

ITA 940/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

learned AR, in the case of the\nappellant, the AO wrongly took the date as 20.04.2021, i.e., the date\nwhen Prohibitory orders under section 132(3) were revoked, whereas in\nlaw, the search itself stood concluded much earlier when the authorized\nofficer and the search team finally left the premises ... wherein it was held that the\nsearch comes to an end when the search party leaves the premises, and\nProhibitory orders issued under section 132(3) of the Act cannot be\nequated to continuation of search. The learned AR also placed reliance\non various other case laws which are available

SRI SRINIVASA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

ITA 939/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nShri M.V Prasad, CA & Shri KS Rajendra KumarFor Respondent: \nShri Muthu Shankar, CIT &
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 25Section 250Section 8

learned AR, in the case of the\nappellant, the AO wrongly took the date as 20.04.2021, i.e., the date\nwhen Prohibitory orders under section 132(3) were revoked, whereas in\nlaw, the search itself stood concluded much earlier when the authorized\nofficer and the search team finally left the premises ... wherein it was held that the\nsearch comes to an end when the search party leaves the premises, and\nProhibitory orders issued under section 132(3) of the Act cannot be\nequated to continuation of search. The learned AR also placed reliance\non various other case laws which are available

SH. SANJAY JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 2765/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Accountnat Member & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2011-12] Shri Sanjay Jain, Dcit, Cc-01, I-42, Ashok Vihar, Phase-1, New Delhi New Delhi-110052 Vs Pan-Aagpj1372G Assessee Revenue Assessee By Shri Rajiv Saxena, Adv. Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Adv. Shri Shyam Sunder, Adv. & Shri Dishant Seth, Adv. Revenue By Ms. Monika Dhami, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29.09.2025

Section 132Section 132(4)

office premises of Surya Vinayak Industries whose search was already concluded and no incriminating material was found. Ld. AR submitted that as per section 132(3) of the Act order of prohibition is issued where it is not practical to seize but no such office or premises were ever sealed

SURESH KUMAR REDDY KRISHNAPURAM,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 539/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SURESH KUMAR REDDY KRISHNAPURAM,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 538/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SURESH KUMAR REDDY KRISHNAPURAM,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 537/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SURESH KUMAR REDDY KRISHNAPURAM,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 536/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gsl. No.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 535/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nHYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND

SKANDHANSHI INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 534/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SKANDA DEVELOPERS & BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 533/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 532/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nHYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 531/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \nHYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD \nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT \nAND

SKANDA BUILDERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 530/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 529/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nHYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 528/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the different Assessee’s are allowed

ITA 527/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA

SKANDHANSHI DEVELOPERS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 526/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND

SKANDA INFRA PROJECTS,KURNOOL vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 525/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nHYDERABAD “B” BENCH: HYDERABAD\nBEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND

Showing 1–20 of 86 · Page 1 of 5

Section 132(3) — 86 judgments | BharatTax | BharatTax