https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253196 The HC upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. The court held that while search and seizure operations for preventing crime are constitutionally permissible, statements recorded under Section 132(4) cannot be the sole basis for imposing additional tax liability or prosecution. Such statements can be relied upon as evidence only if not retracted or if supported by other material. If retracted, the Assessing Officer must establish the case independently. The Explanation to Section 132(4) applies to pending proceedings as evidence but cannot alone burden an assessee. The revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 24 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 May 2025 16:29:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253196 The HC upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act. The court held that while search and seizure operations for preventing crime are constitutionally permissible, statements recorded under Section 132(4) cannot be the sole basis for imposing additional tax liability or prosecution. Such statements can be relied upon as evidence only if not retracted or if supported by other material. If retracted, the Assessing Officer must establish the case independently. The Explanation to Section 132(4) applies to pending proceedings as evidence but cannot alone burden an assessee. The revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253196