← 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)

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. Surender Gupta, Delhi

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

ITA 2873/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.1670 To 1672/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Surender Gupta, Dy. Cit, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Central Circle-30, H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Vs. Delhi. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Cit, Surender Gupta, Central Circle-1, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Noida. Vs. H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mayank Patwari, Adv. & Shri Aakash Ojha, Adv. Department By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A) In Short”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act In Short”], All Are Dated 24.02.2025 Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer U/S 153A R.W.S Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 Surender Gupta Vs. Dcit 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Respectively.

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

account of bogus purchases by applying the G.P. rate & ignoring the incriminating material and corroborative evidence seized during the search, including statements under section 132(4), WhatsApp chats, and Tally data evidencing the use of accommodation entries. 5. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Noida vs. Surender Gupta, Delhi

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

ITA 2872/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.1670 To 1672/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Surender Gupta, Dy. Cit, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Central Circle-30, H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Vs. Delhi. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Cit, Surender Gupta, Central Circle-1, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Noida. Vs. H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mayank Patwari, Adv. & Shri Aakash Ojha, Adv. Department By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A) In Short”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act In Short”], All Are Dated 24.02.2025 Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer U/S 153A R.W.S Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 Surender Gupta Vs. Dcit 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Respectively.

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

account of bogus purchases by applying the G.P. rate & ignoring the incriminating material and corroborative evidence seized during the search, including statements under section 132(4), WhatsApp chats, and Tally data evidencing the use of accommodation entries. 5. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle I Noida, Noida vs. Surender Gupta, Delhi

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

ITA 2871/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.1670 To 1672/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Surender Gupta, Dy. Cit, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Central Circle-30, H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Vs. Delhi. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Cit, Surender Gupta, Central Circle-1, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Noida. Vs. H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mayank Patwari, Adv. & Shri Aakash Ojha, Adv. Department By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A) In Short”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act In Short”], All Are Dated 24.02.2025 Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer U/S 153A R.W.S Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 Surender Gupta Vs. Dcit 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Respectively.

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

account of bogus purchases by applying the G.P. rate & ignoring the incriminating material and corroborative evidence seized during the search, including statements under section 132(4), WhatsApp chats, and Tally data evidencing the use of accommodation entries. 5. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

Surender Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

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

ITA 1672/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.1670 To 1672/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Surender Gupta, Dy. Cit, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Central Circle-30, H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Vs. Delhi. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Cit, Surender Gupta, Central Circle-1, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Noida. Vs. H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mayank Patwari, Adv. & Shri Aakash Ojha, Adv. Department By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A) In Short”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act In Short”], All Are Dated 24.02.2025 Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer U/S 153A R.W.S Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 Surender Gupta Vs. Dcit 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Respectively.

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

account of bogus purchases by applying the G.P. rate & ignoring the incriminating material and corroborative evidence seized during the search, including statements under section 132(4), WhatsApp chats, and Tally data evidencing the use of accommodation entries. 5. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

Surender Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

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

ITA 1671/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.1670 To 1672/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Surender Gupta, Dy. Cit, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Central Circle-30, H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Vs. Delhi. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Cit, Surender Gupta, Central Circle-1, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Noida. Vs. H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mayank Patwari, Adv. & Shri Aakash Ojha, Adv. Department By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A) In Short”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act In Short”], All Are Dated 24.02.2025 Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer U/S 153A R.W.S Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 Surender Gupta Vs. Dcit 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Respectively.

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

account of bogus purchases by applying the G.P. rate & ignoring the incriminating material and corroborative evidence seized during the search, including statements under section 132(4), WhatsApp chats, and Tally data evidencing the use of accommodation entries. 5. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case

Surender Gupta, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

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

ITA 1670/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos.1670 To 1672/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Surender Gupta, Dy. Cit, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Central Circle-30, H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Vs. Delhi. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 (Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21) Dy. Cit, Surender Gupta, Central Circle-1, A-27, Phase-1, Ashok Vihar, Noida. Vs. H.O. North West Delhi-110052. Pan-Aaopg2234J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mayank Patwari, Adv. & Shri Aakash Ojha, Adv. Department By Ms. Rajinder Kaur, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 20.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: The Captioned Cross Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against Three Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A) In Short”] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act In Short”], All Are Dated 24.02.2025 Against The Orders Of The Assessing Officer U/S 153A R.W.S Ita Nos.2871 To 2873/Del/2025 Surender Gupta Vs. Dcit 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act” For Short) For Assessment Years 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 Respectively.

Section 127Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153DSection 250

account of bogus purchases by applying the G.P. rate & ignoring the incriminating material and corroborative evidence seized during the search, including statements under section 132(4), WhatsApp chats, and Tally data evidencing the use of accommodation entries. 5. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case