Section 132B of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.250

Section 132B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 250 (Application of seized or requisitioned assets) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 250 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 132B is CIT v. Mahendra C. Shah (299 ITR 305), cited in 80 of the 100 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 132B

CIT v. Mahendra C. Shah
299 ITR 305 · 2008 · High Court
80
citing judgments

During a search operation, the authorized officer recording a statement under Section 132(4) must fully explain Explanation 5 to Section 271(1)(c) to the assessee, particularly the requirement to specify the manner of earning undisclosed income, for a valid claim of penalty immunity. Income not declared or advance tax not paid proportionately before the search date is treated as undisclosed, thereby disallowing advance tax benefits.

Mahaan Foods Ltd. v. DCIT
27 DTR 185 · 2009 · Reported
16
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made based on a seized document that is 'dumb' or 'deaf and dumb' without any further evidence to prove the assessee actually incurred the expenditure or made the payment mentioned.

S Goyal v. DCIT
100 TTJ 665 · 2006 · ITAT
12
citing judgments

Income-tax additions cannot be made solely based on uncorroborated notes found on loose sheets of paper.

Mum) (b) Chandra Mohan Mehta Vs. ACIT (1999) 65 TTJ 327 (Pune) (c) Bansal Strips Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
42 TTJ 423 · 1991 · ITAT
11
citing judgments

Addition to income cannot be made solely on the basis of uncorroborated notations found on loose papers.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax v. Satya Pal Wassan
295 ITR 9 · 2007 · High Court
8
citing judgments
CIT v. Arun Kapoor
334 ITR 351 · 2011 · High Court
7
citing judgments
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Narendra N. Thacker
82 Taxmann.com 64 · 2017 · Reported
6
citing judgments
261\n• CIT Vs. Kamal Galani, 110 Taxmann.com 213\n• Chokshi Hiralal Maganlal v. DCIT
128 Taxmann.com 406 · 2021 · ITAT
5
citing judgments
CIT v. Singhal Industrial Corporation
303 ITR 225 · 2008 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Tyaryamal Balchand
32 Taxmann 64 · 1987 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 132B

Pankajkumar Atmaram Prajapati, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITSSA 74/AHD/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalit(Ss)A No. 74/Ahd/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Vs. Pankajkumar Atmaram Prajapati, The Deputy Commissioner Of C-207, Megha Arcade, Opp. Income-Tax, Ganesh Dwar Bungalows, Central Circle 2(1), Chainpur, New Ranip, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382470 Pan : Aidpp 6641 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2024 सुनवाई सुनवाई सुनवाई क" क" तारीख तारीख घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03.05.2024 घोषणा घोषणा घोषणा क" क" तारीख तारीख आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-12 [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 25.03.2022 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 217 Days On The Part Of The Assessee In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application Dated 23.12.2022 Seeking Condonation Of The Said Delay On The Following Grounds:- “To The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Benches, Ahmedabad

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 133ASection 250(6)