← 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)

R.K.Infracorp Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

ITA 363/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.235/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. R.K. Infracorp Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri M V Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr (Hybrid Mode) आ.अपी. सं/Ita No.363/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. R.K. Infracorp Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Appellant) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) Shri M V Prasad, Ca Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 25/02/2026 Pronouncement: 2

For Appellant: Shri M V Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 37(1)Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. R.K.Infracorp Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 235/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.235/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. R.K. Infracorp Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Appellant) Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा /Assessee By: Shri M V Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: | Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr (Hybrid Mode) आ.अपी. सं/Ita No.363/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year:2020-21) M/S. R.K. Infracorp Private Vs. Deputy Commissioner Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaecr0071P (Appellant) Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee By: Shri M V Prasad, Ca राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 07/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of 25/02/2026 Pronouncement: 2

For Appellant: Shri M V Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 37(1)Section 69A

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Singhvi Developers, Vellore

In the result, both appeals of Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 974/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.648/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Singhvi Developers, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 5/3, Kasi Chetty Street, Income Tax, Ambur 635 803. Central Circle 3(3), Chennai. [Pan:Acdfs5183R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.974/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Singhvi Developers, Income Tax, No. 5/3, Kasi Chetty Street, Central Circle 3(3), Ambur 635 803. Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Department By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 20, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद

Singhvi Developers, Ambur vs. DCIT Central Circle 3(3), Chennai

In the result, both appeals of Revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 648/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.648/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Singhvi Developers, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 5/3, Kasi Chetty Street, Income Tax, Ambur 635 803. Central Circle 3(3), Chennai. [Pan:Acdfs5183R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.974/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Singhvi Developers, Income Tax, No. 5/3, Kasi Chetty Street, Central Circle 3(3), Ambur 635 803. Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Department By : Shri C.N. Bipin, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Are Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 20, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.N. Bipin, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद