← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. Al-Foulek Residency Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch

Appeal is allowed

ITA 441/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.437 & 441/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Al Foulek Residency P Ltd. Asstt. Commissioner Of Shop No.7, Chandni Complex, Mouje Income-Tax, Circle-1, Hari Kunj, 1St Floor, Income Tax Dungri, Bharuch-392001 Office, Station Road, Vs. Bharuch-392001 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income- Al Foulek Residency P Ltd. Tax, Circle-1, Hari Kunj, 1St Floor, Shop No.7, Chandni Complex, Income Tax Office, Station Road, Mouje Dungri, Bharuch-392001 Bharuch-392001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakca 1031 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B.Koli– CIT.DR
Section 143(3)

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,20,30,000/- made on account of unaccounted on-money received in cash relying on Gujarat High Court’s decision in the case of CIT vs. Shivalik Build Well (P) Ltd. [2013] 40 taxmann.com ... customer. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in appreciating the fact that the receipts were not in the nature of advance but unaccounted on-money which assessee failed to record in its books of account. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals

Al-Foulek Residency Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bharuch

Appeal is allowed

ITA 437/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.437 & 441/Srt/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Court Hearing) Al Foulek Residency P Ltd. Asstt. Commissioner Of Shop No.7, Chandni Complex, Mouje Income-Tax, Circle-1, Hari Kunj, 1St Floor, Income Tax Dungri, Bharuch-392001 Office, Station Road, Vs. Bharuch-392001 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income- Al Foulek Residency P Ltd. Tax, Circle-1, Hari Kunj, 1St Floor, Shop No.7, Chandni Complex, Income Tax Office, Station Road, Mouje Dungri, Bharuch-392001 Bharuch-392001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakca 1031 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B.Koli– CIT.DR
Section 143(3)

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.1,20,30,000/- made on account of unaccounted on-money received in cash relying on Gujarat High Court’s decision in the case of CIT vs. Shivalik Build Well (P) Ltd. [2013] 40 taxmann.com ... customer. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in appreciating the fact that the receipts were not in the nature of advance but unaccounted on-money which assessee failed to record in its books of account. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals

Ankush Ramrao Shinde, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes in the same terms

ITA 1054/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1053/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 1054/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ankush Ramrao Shinde Income Tax Officer 19A, Cosmos Horizon Skyline - 20(1)(1), Mumbai Chs, Pokharan Road 2, Room No. 124, 1St Floor, Versus Thane- 400601 Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Aetps2857J (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri. Naganath B. Pasale, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per N K Choudhry: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Even Dated 31St March, 2023 Impugned Herein Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac) Delhi, {In Short ‘Ld. Commissioner’ U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For Ays 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Naganath B. Pasale, Ld. DR
Section 148Section 250Section 69

letter dated 07.03.2016 informed that a search and seizure action was conducted on Cosmos Gorup on 24.09.2014 It was informed that the details of on-money provided by various flat buyers was maintained in gmail and yahoo mail account of Cosmos group. During the course of search & seizure action statement ... element involved in the sale of the flats. In the statement of Smt. Meenal Mahesh Patil, head of accounts of Cosmos Group accepted that on-money is being taken and cash transaction are being done during the sale of flats by cosmos group. She accepted that she used to fill

Ankush Ramrao Shinde, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes in the same terms

ITA 1053/MUM/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jul 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri N. K. Choudhry, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1053/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 1054/Mum/2023 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ankush Ramrao Shinde Income Tax Officer 19A, Cosmos Horizon Skyline - 20(1)(1), Mumbai Chs, Pokharan Road 2, Room No. 124, 1St Floor, Versus Thane- 400601 Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Aetps2857J (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri. Naganath B. Pasale, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per N K Choudhry: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Orders Even Dated 31St March, 2023 Impugned Herein Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac) Delhi, {In Short ‘Ld. Commissioner’ U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For Ays 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Naganath B. Pasale, Ld. DR
Section 148Section 250Section 69

letter dated 07.03.2016 informed that a search and seizure action was conducted on Cosmos Gorup on 24.09.2014 It was informed that the details of on-money provided by various flat buyers was maintained in gmail and yahoo mail account of Cosmos group. During the course of search & seizure action statement ... element involved in the sale of the flats. In the statement of Smt. Meenal Mahesh Patil, head of accounts of Cosmos Group accepted that on-money is being taken and cash transaction are being done during the sale of flats by cosmos group. She accepted that she used to fill