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

M/S. Jai Salasar Balaji Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-Xiii, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2142/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A No. 2142/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Jai Salasar Balaji Pvt. Ltd. -Vs.- D.C.I.T., Central Circle-Xiii, Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaacj 6970 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, Fca For The Respondent : Shri Bani Brata Dutta, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12.04.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 03.05.2017. Order Per N.V.Vasudevan, Jm This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.09.2014 Of C.I.T.(A)-Central-Ii, Kolkata Relating To A.Y.2009-10. 2. In This Appeal The Assessee Has Challenged The Order Of Cit(A) Whereby The Cit(A) Confirmed The Order Of Ap Imposing Penalty On The Assessee U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax 1961 (Act). 3. The Facts & Circumstances Under The Penalty Was Imposed On The Assessee By The Ao Are As Follows :- There Was A Search & Seizure Operation Conducted By The Revenue U/S 132 Of The Act In Jai Balaji Group. The Assessee Was Also A Part Of The Jai Balaji Group & The Assessee’S Business Premises Was Also Search By The Revenue On 09.06.2011. In The Course Of Search The Assessee Made Disclosure Of Rs.46 Lakhs In The Statement Of The Director Recorded U/S 132(4) Of The Act. The Director Of The Assessee Made A Disclosure Of Rs.46 Lakhs As Undisclosed Income & Agreed To Disclose The Said Sum In The Return Of Income To Be Filed For A.Y.2009-10.The Break-Up Of The Disclosure Of Undisclosed Income Can Be Summed Up In The Form Of The Following Chart :-

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Bani Brata Dutta, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 5A

DCIT Cen Cir 8(4), Mumbai vs. Silver Arch Builders & Promoters, Mumbai

ITA 3162/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Ramlal Negiआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3162/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.: 2007-08 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3163/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.: 2008-09 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dcit –Cc,8(4) Silver Arch Builders & Promotors 6Th Floor, Room No.658 12/14,Gordhan Building, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Parekh Road,Prarthana Samaj Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 004. Pan:Aayfs 2047 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: S.Padmaja -Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: None . सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 02/05/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 02/05/2017 लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार/ Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dated 29.02.2016 Of The Cit(A)- 47,Mumbai,The Assessing Officer(Ao) Has Filed The Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Assessment Years(Ay.S). As The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Identical,So,We Are Adjudicating The Appeals By A Common Order,For The Sake Of Convenience.Assessee-Firm Is A Real Estate Developer.The Details Of Filing Of Returns Of Income,Returned Incomes & Dates Of Assessment Etc. Can Be Summarised As Under: Ay. Roi Filed On Returned Income Assessment Date Assessed Income 2007-08 27.10.2007 36,65,970/- 29/03/2014 73,37,860/- 04.03.2013 36,65,970/- 2008-09 30.09.2008 84,85,680/- 29.03.2014 1,31,67,390/- 04.03.2013 80,40,730/-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: S.Padmaja -DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153A