Section 132A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: ss.248, 251

Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 248 (Powers to requisition) 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 248 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 132A is CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573), cited in 3,235 of the 569 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 132A

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.

Pr. CIT v. Saumya Constructions (P.)Ltd.
387 ITR 529 · 2016 · High Court
670
citing judgments

Assessments under Section 153A cannot be sustained without any incriminating material found during the search that substantiates the additions. This principle applies even to completed assessments where no additional income is disclosed.

CIT v. Gurinder Singh Bawa
386 ITR 483 · 2016 · High Court
416
citing judgments

If no incriminating material is found during a search operation regarding a particular issue, then no addition can be made concerning that issue in an assessment under section 153A of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. IBC Knowledge Park (P.) Ltd.
385 ITR 346 · 2016 · High Court
371
citing judgments

A statement made by an assessee under Section 131 during search proceedings, without any corroborating incriminating material found during the search, cannot solely constitute incriminating evidence for making additions in assessments under Section 153A or 153C.

Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen
56 ITR 198 · 1965 · Supreme Court
230
citing judgments

The Supreme Court holds that circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) are binding on all officers and persons employed in the execution of the Income-tax Act. These circulars are binding even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act, particularly when issued to relieve hardships.

Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT
82 ITR 913 · 1971 · Supreme Court
209
citing judgments
Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer
161 Taxmann.com 485 · 2024 · High Court
196
citing judgments

Recording satisfaction under Section 153C for initiating proceedings against a third person is not a mechanical exercise; it requires a finding that seized material has a direct bearing on the third person's income, and improper satisfaction vitiates the assessment. Abatement under the second proviso to Section 153A is an inevitable consequence of a search, irrespective of the Assessing Officer's opinion on the material's impact.

Pr. CIT v. Sunrise Finlease P. Ltd.
89 Taxmann.com 1 · 2018 · High Court
120
citing judgments
CIT v. Hotel Savera
239 ITR 795 · 1999 · High Court
119
citing judgments

When an assessee has sufficient interest-free own funds available to make interest-free advances or investments, it is presumed that such advances or investments are made from these interest-free funds, thereby preventing the disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii).

Gurinder Singh Bawa v. DCIT
28 Taxmann.com 328 · 2012 · ITAT
99
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 132A

Mukul Lahkar, Tezpur vs. Central Circle-2, Guwahati

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 92/GTY/2026[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati08 May 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2022-23 Mukul Lahkar…………………………………………………..…..Appellant Rubber Bagan, Near Chandi Mandap Tezpur, Ward No.15, Tezpur Assam-784001 [Pan: Aarpl7254N] Vs. Central Circle-2, Guwahati………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances By: None, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 07, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 08, 2026 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.10.2025 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)] U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’) For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. The Assessee Has Preferred The Appeal Before The Tribunal With A Delay Of 49 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Explaining The Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Reasons Stated Therein, We Are Satisfied That There Was A Reasonable Cause Which Prevented The Assessee From Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time. Accordingly, The Delay Of 49 Days Is Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Running An Imfl Retail Outlet. During The

Section 115BSection 132ASection 147Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

Uma Kant Garg, Delhi vs. ACIT, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7289/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.7289/धिल्ली/2025 (नि.व. 2020-21) Uma Kant Garg, 36, Shera Mohalla, Garhi, Delhi 110065 ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant Pan: Afxpg-6149-Q बिाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-62(1), ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent Delhi 110002 अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant By : Shri D C Garg, Chartered Accountant प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr (Through Vc) सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date Of Hearing : 16/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 11/03/2026 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 24.09.2025, For Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. Shri D. C. Garg, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submits That The Assessee In Appeal Has Raised Legal Ground Assailing Validity Of Reopening Of Assessment. The Assessee In Grounds Of Appeal Has Also Challenged Addition On Merits. The Ld. Counsel Pointed That Reopening Of Assessment Is Bad In Law As The Notice Issued U/S 148 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) & The Approval Granted U/S 151 Of The Act By The Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Pcit) Are Unsigned. To Substantiate His Contention, He Referred To Copy Of The 2 Notice Placed At Page 2 Of The Paper Book & The Approval Granted U/S 151 Of The Act Placed At Pages 3 & 4 Of The Paper Book. The Ld. Counsel Further Pointed That After The Issuance Of The Notice U/S 148 Of The Act, The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 29.06.2024 Declaring Income Of Rs.10,23,800/-. Thereafter, The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued Notice U/S 143(2) R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 07.10.2024. The Said Notice Is At Pages 26 To 29 Of The Paper Book. In The Said Notice It Is Mentioned That:-

For Appellant: Shri D C Garg, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR (Through VC)
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151