← All Phrases

“Section 132(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 132Section 132(4)5,206 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 132(4) is Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. (149 Taxmann.com 399), cited in 2,379 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 132(4)

Pr. CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd.
149 Taxmann.com 399 · 2023 · Supreme Court
2,379
citing judgments

An assessment under section 153A is without jurisdiction if there is an absence of incriminating material for an unabated assessment year.

Andaman Timber Industries v. CCE
281 CTR 241 · 2015 · Supreme Court
1,335
citing judgments

An assessee must be given an opportunity to cross-examine third parties whose statements are relied upon for adverse findings. Failure to provide this opportunity is a serious flaw rendering the order a nullity.

Pr. CIT v. Meeta Gutgutia
395 ITR 526 · 2017 · High Court
1,226
citing judgments

In search assessments under Section 153A, additions to income are permissible only if incriminating material is found during the search; in the absence of such material, completed assessments cannot be disturbed. A statement recorded under Section 132(4) and later retracted may not, on its own, constitute sufficient incriminating evidence for making additions.

CIT v. SSA’s Emerald Meadows
73 Taxmann.com 248 · 2016 · Supreme Court
953
citing judgments

A notice issued under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if it fails to specify whether penalty proceedings are for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Such lack of specificity vitiates the penalty proceedings.

PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd.
397 ITR 82 · 2017 · High Court
786
citing judgments

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not by itself constitute incriminating material for making additions to income.

McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO
154 ITR 148 · 1985 · Supreme Court
741
citing judgments

The Supreme Court held that while legitimate tax planning is permissible, transactions structured as a "colourable device" or "subterfuge" solely to avoid tax are impermissible. It mandates a judicial shift to look beyond the form to the substance of a transaction, allowing the lifting of the corporate veil in tax evasion arrangements.

Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala
91 ITR 18 · 1973 · Supreme Court
666
citing judgments

Admissions, whether made through entries in account books or statements, are important pieces of evidence but are not conclusive. An assessee has the right to demonstrate that an admission made by them is incorrect or can be retracted.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal
290 CTR 263 · 2016 · High Court
583
citing judgments

Assessment based solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act requires the statement to be relatable to incriminating material or evidence found during the search, especially when considering Section 158BB(1) which restricts computation of undisclosed income to evidence found during search.

Judgments citing Section 132(4)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad vs. Marsh Fincom Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 1342/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1342/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit, Aurangabad. Vs. Marsh Fincom Pvt. Ltd., 9Th Floor, Gold Crest, Ns Road No.10, Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- 400049. Pan : Aabck0760B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Deepak Shah Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak Date Of Hearing : 26.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.08.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.09.2023 Passed By Ld Cit(A)-12, Pune For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Facts By Quashing Proceedings U/S. 153A In Respect Of Assessee Where The Assessee’S Case Was Covered Under Section 132 Of The Act Dated 20.08.2014. 2. Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Ao Has Made

For Appellant: Shri Deepak ShahFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY

DCIT, Chennai vs. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai, Chennai

In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the assessee-firm as well as individual assessee, stand allowed for all the years

ITA 1650/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1611/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1612/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1613/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1614/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1615/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai Dcit बनाम/ 128 ,129 & 130 & 129 & 130 Central Circle-1(2) Vs. Usman Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Absfs-1523-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1645/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1646/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1647/Chny/2023

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी एबी टी

DCIT, Chennai vs. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai, Chennai

In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the assessee-firm as well as individual assessee, stand allowed for all the years

ITA 1649/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1611/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1612/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1613/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1614/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1615/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai Dcit बनाम/ 128 ,129 & 130 & 129 & 130 Central Circle-1(2) Vs. Usman Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Absfs-1523-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1645/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1646/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1647/Chny/2023

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी एबी टी

DCIT, Chennai vs. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai, Chennai

In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the assessee-firm as well as individual assessee, stand allowed for all the years

ITA 1648/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1611/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1612/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1613/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1614/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1615/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai Dcit बनाम/ 128 ,129 & 130 & 129 & 130 Central Circle-1(2) Vs. Usman Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Absfs-1523-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1645/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1646/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1647/Chny/2023

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी एबी टी

DCIT, Chennai vs. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai, Chennai

In the result, the corresponding grounds raised by the assessee-firm as well as individual assessee, stand allowed for all the years

ITA 1647/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1611/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1612/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1613/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1614/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No. 1615/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. New Saravana Stores Bramandamai Dcit बनाम/ 128 ,129 & 130 & 129 & 130 Central Circle-1(2) Vs. Usman Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Absfs-1523-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1645/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 7. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1646/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 8. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1647/Chny/2023

Section 132Section 153ASection 250(6)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी एबी टी