← 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

DCIT, Central Circle 1, Rajkot vs. Naresh Organisers Pvt. Ltd., Rjakot

ITA 503/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.522 To 527/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2017-2018 To 2022-23) बनाम Naresh Organisers Private Limited The Dcit, Cc-1 Rajkot Officer No. 702 R K Prime, 150 Feet Ring Vs. “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Road Next To Silver Heights, Nava Mava Road, Rajkot 360001, Gujrat Circle, Rajkot 360005, Gujrat /. /. Pan No. : Aaccn1282A "थायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.503, 515 To 517/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: (2018-19 To 2021-22) बनाम The Dcit, Cc-1 Rajkot Naresh Organisers Private Limited “Amruta Estate,” 2Nd Floor, Mg Vs. Officer No. 702 R K Prime, 150 Feet Road, Rajkot 360001, Gujrat Ring Road Next To Silver Heights, Nava Mava Circle, Rajkot 360005, Gujrat /. /. Pan No. : Aaccn1282A "थायीलेखासं जीआइआरसं .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranapura, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pungulia, Ld. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

directing the AO to tax the unaccounted profit in the year in which sale deed is executed instead of the year in which the on-money has been received, ignoring that the same is not in accordance with Accounting principles as per ICDS-3 applicable to Real Estate Developers ... also not appreciating that the income on account of undisclosed on-money receipt was required to be assessed in the year of receipt. (This is revenue's ground no. 2 in ITA No. 503/RJT/2024 for AY 2018-19, this is revenue's ground no. 2 in ITA No.515/RJT/2024