← 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)

Shri Balaji India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1, Faridabad

Accordingly, the present appeals, along with all pending applications, are dismissed

ITA 5752/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 5744/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2019-20 Ita No. 5745/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Ita No. 5752/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Shri Balaji (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Vpo Badshahpur, Near Arya Samaj Central Circle-1, Mandir, Gurgaon-122017 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccs5328Q Assessee By: Sh. Anshul Mittal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Three Appeals Ita Nos. 5744, 5745 & 5752/Del/2024, For Assessment Years 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22, Arise Against The Cit(A)-3, Gurgaon’S Orders Dated 21St & 22Nd October, 2024 Passed In Case Nos. 10964/2018-19, 10827/2019-20 & 10090/2020-21, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Anshul Mittal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

during the course of the search and assessment proceeding which followed thereafter. Mr. Sharma also emphasised that the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be relied upon for any purpose in terms of the language of the Act and thus action under section 153A was justified ... support of his contention are not applicable here.” 7. The preliminary question under consideration before us is whether a statement under Section 132(4) constitutes incriminating material for carrying out assessment under S. 153(A) of the Act. A reading of the impugned order reveals that the statement

Shri Balaji India Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1, Faridabad

Accordingly, the present appeals, along with all pending applications, are dismissed

ITA 5745/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 5744/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2019-20 Ita No. 5745/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Ita No. 5752/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Shri Balaji (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Vpo Badshahpur, Near Arya Samaj Central Circle-1, Mandir, Gurgaon-122017 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccs5328Q Assessee By: Sh. Anshul Mittal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Three Appeals Ita Nos. 5744, 5745 & 5752/Del/2024, For Assessment Years 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22, Arise Against The Cit(A)-3, Gurgaon’S Orders Dated 21St & 22Nd October, 2024 Passed In Case Nos. 10964/2018-19, 10827/2019-20 & 10090/2020-21, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Anshul Mittal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

during the course of the search and assessment proceeding which followed thereafter. Mr. Sharma also emphasised that the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be relied upon for any purpose in terms of the language of the Act and thus action under section 153A was justified ... support of his contention are not applicable here.” 7. The preliminary question under consideration before us is whether a statement under Section 132(4) constitutes incriminating material for carrying out assessment under S. 153(A) of the Act. A reading of the impugned order reveals that the statement

Shri Balaji India Private Limited, Gurugram vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

Accordingly, the present appeals, along with all pending applications, are dismissed

ITA 5744/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahmanita No. 5744/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2019-20 Ita No. 5745/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2020-21 Ita No. 5752/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2021-22 Shri Balaji (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Vpo Badshahpur, Near Arya Samaj Central Circle-1, Mandir, Gurgaon-122017 Faridabad-121001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccs5328Q Assessee By: Sh. Anshul Mittal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Mahesh Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.07.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: These Assessee’S Three Appeals Ita Nos. 5744, 5745 & 5752/Del/2024, For Assessment Years 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22, Arise Against The Cit(A)-3, Gurgaon’S Orders Dated 21St & 22Nd October, 2024 Passed In Case Nos. 10964/2018-19, 10827/2019-20 & 10090/2020-21, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Anshul Mittal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153ASection 153CSection 260A

during the course of the search and assessment proceeding which followed thereafter. Mr. Sharma also emphasised that the statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Act can be relied upon for any purpose in terms of the language of the Act and thus action under section 153A was justified ... support of his contention are not applicable here.” 7. The preliminary question under consideration before us is whether a statement under Section 132(4) constitutes incriminating material for carrying out assessment under S. 153(A) of the Act. A reading of the impugned order reveals that the statement

Ankit Agarwal, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle 3(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 304/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.301 To 303/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21) Kiran Devi Agarwal, Hyderabad. Pan:Adopa7925R Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.304 To 306/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21) Ankit Agarwal, Hyderabad. Pan:Bnlpa0543D Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: Shri Sharad Chandra Toshniwal, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 14/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By The Captioned Assessees, Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)") For The A.Ys.2018-19 To 2020-21 Respectively. These Six Appeals Of The Assessees Involve Identical Issues Arising Out Of Similar Facts & Are Therefore Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Consistency. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 14 Days In Some Appeals & 15 Days In Others. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions Along With Affidavits, Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Going Through The Condonation Petitions & The Material On Record & Considering The Submissions Of The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. Ar") & The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. Dr”), In The Interest Of Substantial Justice, We Condone The Delay In Filing All The Appeals & Admit Them For Adjudication On Merits.

For Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132(4)Section 153C

cross-examination to assessee was not valid as it amounted to violation of principle of natural justice and against the law. 4.1 Section 132(4) of Income tax Act "(4) The authorised officer may, during the course of the search or seizure, examine on oath any person who is found ... statement to cross check the statement given by Shri Ashok Kumar Agarwal on 04.06.2019. No statement of Petitioner is recorded till date under Section 132(4) of Income Tax Act and when the Ld. AO has is of the firm opinion as per order dated 15.03.2023 that transactions are done

Kiran Devi Agarwal, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle 3(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 303/HYD/2025[2020-2021]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.301 To 303/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21) Kiran Devi Agarwal, Hyderabad. Pan:Adopa7925R (Appellant) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. (Respondent) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.304 To 306/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2018-19 To 2020-21) Ankit Agarwal, Hyderabad. Pan:Bnlpa0543D (Appellant) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Hyderabad. (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: Shri Sharad Chandra Toshniwal, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 09/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 14/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : These Appeals Are Filed By The Captioned Assessees, Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)") For The A.Ys.2018-19 To 2020-21 Respectively. These Six Appeals Of The Assessees Involve Identical Issues Arising Out Of Similar Facts & Are Therefore Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Consistency. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 14 Days In Some Appeals & 15 Days In Others. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petitions Along With Affidavits, Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Going Through The Condonation Petitions & The Material On Record & Considering The Submissions Of The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. Ar") & The Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. Dr"), In The Interest Of Substantial Justice, We Condone The Delay In Filing All The Appeals & Admit Them For Adjudication On Merits.

For Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132(4)Section 153C

cross-examination to assessee was not valid as it amounted to violation of principle of natural justice and against the law. 4.1 Section 132(4) of Income tax Act "(4) The authorised officer may, during the course of the search or seizure, examine on oath any person who is found ... statement to cross check the statement given by Shri Ashok Kumar Agarwal on 04.06.2019. No statement of Petitioner is recorded till date under section 132(4) of Income Tax Act and when the Ld. AO has is of the firm opinion as per order dated 15.03.2023 that transactions are done