← All Phrases

“on-money”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 69BSection 69B1,574 judgments

The decision most relied on for on-money is CIT v. President Industries (258 ITR 654), cited in 471 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on on-money

CIT v. President Industries
258 ITR 654 · 2002 · High Court
471
citing judgments

When books of account are rejected and unaccounted sales or receipts are discovered, the income addition is restricted to the net profit element embedded in these undisclosed transactions, not the entire sale proceeds or receipts, especially if corresponding purchases are not proven to be outside the books.

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar
263 ITR 610 · 2003 · High Court
212
citing judgments

When making an addition for unaccounted receipts, on-money, or non-genuine purchases/sales, the addition should be restricted to the estimated profit element embedded in such transactions, rather than the entire gross amount, particularly when evidence of corresponding expenditure is incomplete. This estimation often involves applying a net profit rate.

CIT v. Girish Chaudhary
296 ITR 619 · 2008 · High Court
175
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on "dumb documents" or vague loose papers seized during a search that merely indicate rates without specific corroborative material linking them to the assessee's unaccounted transactions. The presumption under Section 292C may not apply to such documents.

Principal Commissioner Income Tax, Central-2 v. Umesh Ishrani
108 Taxmann.com 437 · 2019 · High Court
168
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made solely based on entries in loose papers found during a search without conducting any independent inquiry or verification from the alleged seller or developer. Reliance solely on digital records without corroborative evidence is insufficient for an addition.

CIT v. Maulikkumar K. Shah
307 ITR 137 · 2008 · High Court
166
citing judgments

Additions on account of on-money receipts cannot be justified solely based on loose papers or 'sauda-chithis' without evidence of actual payment or a clear indication of a completed transaction within those documents.

CIT v. Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja
302 ITR 63 · 2008 · High Court
147
citing judgments

When unaccounted receipts or suppressed sales are detected and books of account are rejected under Section 145(3), additions to income must be restricted to the profit element embedded in such transactions, not the entire transaction value. This profit element is to be estimated by considering the assessee's regular profit ratio as per books of account.

CIT v. Shivakami Co. (P.) Ltd.
159 ITR 71 · 1986 · Supreme Court
133
citing judgments

The burden of proving an understatement of consideration or the receipt of 'on-money' lies solely with the Revenue, which must provide cogent evidence of actual receipt of higher consideration, beyond mere estimates or suspicion. Additions cannot be made based on assumptions like differences from circle rates without such evidence.

Man Mohan Sadani v. CIT
304 ITR 52 · 2008 · High Court
132
citing judgments

When assessing income from undisclosed or unrecorded sales, the entire sale proceeds cannot be added to the assessee's income; instead, only the net profit embedded in such unaccounted sales, determined by applying the assessee's net profit rate, should be taxed.

Judgments citing on-money

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle vs. Aryan Arcade Limited, Rajkot

ITA 229/RJT/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआ. (खो और ज).सं./It(Ss)A Nos.14/Rjt/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Year: (2014-15) Deputy Commissioner Of Income बनाम Shri Gopal Bhupendra Chudasama, Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta /Vs. Shop 10, Om Shivalik, 8 Chandan Estate", 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, Park, Nr. Paradise Hall, Rajkot-360 Rajkot-360 001 005 (Gujarat) स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ablpc 5612 L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) आ. (खो और ज). सं./It(Ss)A Nos.63 To 65/Rjt/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: (2016-17 To 2018-19) M/S Aryan Arcade Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta | बनाम Estate", 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, /Vs. Rajkot-360 001 Iscon Mega Mall, Basement, Nana Mauva, Main Road, Of 150 Ft, Ring Road, Opp. Nehru Nagar Society, Rajkot-360 009 (Guj) स्थायी लेखा सं./जी आइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafca 0162 P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.229/Rjt/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: (2019-20) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, “Amruta | बनाम M/S Aryan Arcade Ltd. Estate", 2Nd Floor, M.G. Road, /Vs. Iscon Mega Mall, Basement, Nana Rajkot-360001 Mauva, Main Road, Of 150 Ft, Ring Road, Opp. Nehru Nagar Society, Rajkot-360 009(Guj) स्थायी लेखासं./जी आइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aafca 0162 P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Maneesh Upnejja, Ld. Ar & Shri Baldev Raj, Ld. Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19/12/2025 It(Ss)A Nos. 14/Rjt/2024, 63-65/Rjt/2023 & Ita No.229/Rjt/2023, Ays 14-15, 16-17 To 19-20 Gopal B Chudasama & Aryan Arcade Ltd. आदेश/Order Per Bench: This Is Bunch Of Five Appeals By The Revenue, Pertaining To Separate

For Appellant: Shri Maneesh Upnejja, Ld. AR &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in adopting real estate business income @ 15% of unaccounted cash on-money receipts in place of @ 80% without appreciating the facts, evidences found and seized during the course of search and circumstances of the peculiar case ... circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in determining business income on account of receipts of on-money from the real estate business on accrual basis (i.e. in the year of transfer of title and possession of property) instead of year of receipts without appreciating