Section 132 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.247, 249, 251

Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 247 (Search and seizure), section 249 (Reasons not to be disclosed) and section 251 (Copying, extraction, retention and release of books of account and documents seized or requisitioned) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 247 of the 2025 ActRead section 249 of the 2025 ActRead section 251 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 132 is National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (229 ITR 383), cited in 5,834 of the 14,598 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 132

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
229 ITR 383 · 1998 · Supreme Court
5,834
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can consider new claims and additional grounds if the relevant facts are already on record. The purpose of assessment is to correctly determine tax liability, allowing both parties to raise issues.

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

CIT v. Vegetable Products Ltd.
88 ITR 192 · 1973 · Supreme Court
2,664
citing judgments

When two equally plausible interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, or when conflicting views exist from non-jurisdictional High Courts, the interpretation that favors the assessee must be adopted.

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.

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society
397 ITR 344 · 2017 · Supreme Court
1,589
citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT
187 ITR 688 · 1991 · Supreme Court
1,372
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) possesses co-terminus powers with the Assessing Officer and can direct the Assessing Officer to perform actions he failed to do, but cannot introduce a new source of income in the assessment. The appellate assessment must be confined to the items of income that were the subject matter of the original assessment.

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.

Judgments on Section 132

ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata vs. Ems Polyset Private Limited, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2193/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.2193&2194/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2112-13 Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata.…………………….…………….……....Appellant Vs. Ems Polyset Pvt. Ltd………………………………………….…..... Respondent Gobinda Niwas, Jyangra, Baguihati, Kolkata - 700059. [Pan: Aaace5551F] Appearances By: Shri Susanta Saha, Acit- Sr. Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Subrato Rai, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 13, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 18, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue Against Two Separate Orders Both Dated 06.08.2024 Passed By The Cit(Appeals) Addl/Jcit(A), Madurai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2012-13 Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. First, We Take Up Ita No.2193/Kol/2024 For Narration Of Facts. 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Are Delays Of 27 Days In Filing Both The Present Appeals. The Revenue Filed Applications For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Applications, We Find Reasonable Cause. We

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 250

Suresh Nag Yadav, Ranchi vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 1, Ranchi

In the result, ITA No. 08/RAN/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/RAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. Nos.08 To 12/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 To 2016-17 Suresh Nag Yadav……………......................…...........................……….……Appellant Yadav Bhawan, Karatoli, Jharkhand - 834008. [Pan: Aafpy5311D] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi..…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri V. K. Jalan, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 13, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dated 28.11.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17 Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, All The Appeals Are Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. First We Proceed To Deal With Ita No. 08/Ran/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 & Our Findings Therein Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.37,56,390. A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On 29.11.2018 At The Business & Residential Premises Of The Assessee. In Consequence Thereof, A Notice Under Section 153A Of The Act Was Issued. In Response, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 21.05.2020 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.38,56,390/-, Including Additional Income Of Rs.1,00,000 Disclosed

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)

Suresh Nag Yadav, Ranchi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Ranchi

In the result, ITA No. 08/RAN/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 12/RAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. Nos.08 To 12/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 To 2016-17 Suresh Nag Yadav……………......................…...........................……….……Appellant Yadav Bhawan, Karatoli, Jharkhand - 834008. [Pan: Aafpy5311D] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-1, Ranchi..…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri V. K. Jalan, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 07, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 13, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: These Five Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Common Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Dated 28.11.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17 Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, All The Appeals Are Heard Together & Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience. First We Proceed To Deal With Ita No. 08/Ran/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 & Our Findings Therein Shall Apply Mutatis Mutandis To The Other Appeals. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.37,56,390. A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Conducted On 29.11.2018 At The Business & Residential Premises Of The Assessee. In Consequence Thereof, A Notice Under Section 153A Of The Act Was Issued. In Response, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 21.05.2020 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.38,56,390/-, Including Additional Income Of Rs.1,00,000 Disclosed

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)