← All Phrases

“on money receipt”

Cash Credits & Unexplained ItemsSection 69BSection 69B350 judgments

The decision most relied on for on money receipt is Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT (50 ITR 1), cited in 581 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on on money receipt

Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT
50 ITR 1 · 1963 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

The assessee bears the onus of proving the source and nature of any sum of money or receipt found to have been received by them. If the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the receipt, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income.

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.

Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT
228 ITR 253 · 1997 · Supreme Court
429
citing judgments

A subsidy is treated as a revenue receipt if the assessee is free to use the money in its business as it likes and is not obligated to spend it for a specific capital purpose, such as acquiring assets or repaying loans.

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.

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.

Glass Lines Equipments Company Ltd. v. CIT
253 ITR 454 · 2002 · High Court
150
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot selectively accept parts of a statement or seized evidence that are favourable to the revenue while rejecting other parts favourable to the assessee without proper investigation; the evidence must be considered as a whole. Additions cannot be made based on mere presumptions or surmises without further inquiry.

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.

Judgments citing on money receipt

Rk Dreamland, Rajkot vs. ACIT, CC-1, Rajkot

ITA 556/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita No. 555 To 560/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17 To 2021-22 (Hybrid Hearing) M/S R K Dreamland 204, Surya Arcade, Nr. Bank Of Baroda Main Branch, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Vs. The Dcit, Cc-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Amruta Estate, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 स्थायीलेखासं/. जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aarfr4023P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं/. Ita No. 563 & 564/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17 To 2017-18 The Dcit, Cc-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Amruta Estate, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Vs. M/S R K Dreamland 204, Surya Arcade, Nr. Bank Of Baroda Main Branch, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 स्थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aarfr4023P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/03/2026 Order Per, Bench: Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To

For Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

erred on facts as also in law in retaining addition of Rs.83,02,640/- by estimating profit at 16% of so called on money receipt. The addition made is bad in law as also on facts therefore the same may kindly be deleted. Alternatively, the addition made by estimating rate ... with accounting principles as per ICDS-3 applicable to Real Estate Developers and 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. 563/RJT/2024

R K Dreamland, Rajkot vs. ACIT, CC-1, Rajkot, Rajokt

ITA 555/RJT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/. Ita No. 555 To 560/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17 To 2021-22 (Hybrid Hearing) Vs. The Dcit, Cc-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Amruta Estate, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 M/S R K Dreamland 204, Surya Arcade, Nr. Bank Of Baroda Main Branch, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) स्थायीलेखासं/. जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aarfr4023P आयकर अपील सं/. Ita No. 563 & 564/Rjt/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2016-17 To 2017-18 Vs. M/S R K Dreamland The Dcit, Cc-1 Aaykar Bhawan, Amruta Estate, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 204, Surya Arcade, Nr. Bank Of Baroda Main Branch, Mg Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) स्थायीलेखासं/.जीआइआरसं/.Pan/Gir No.: Aarfr4023P निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee By राजस्व की ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.Ar : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/03/2026 Order Per, Bench: Captioned Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Pertaining To

For Respondent: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

erred on facts as also in law in retaining addition of Rs.83,02,640/- by estimating profit at 16% of so called on money receipt. The addition made is bad in law as also on facts therefore the same may kindly be deleted. Alternatively, the addition made by estimating rate ... with accounting principles as per ICDS-3 applicable to Real Estate Developers and 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. 563/RJT/2024

Radhe Developers, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central -1, Rajkot

ITA 550/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 549 & 550/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 (Hybrid Hearing) Radhe Developers Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1 . Office No. 47, Ankur Commercial Center, Opp. Income Tax Office, Amruta Swaminarayan Gurukul, Estate Building, Near Girnar Gondal Road, Rajkot Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfr3387E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

Business Corner" developed by the assessee -firm, M/s Radhe Developers have been recovered from the material seized during the search operation - (i)Unaccounted (on-money) receipts against sale of units of the project "Business Corner 5.As details regarding unaccounted part of the aforementioned transactions pertaining to the assessee have been ... thus, be seen that consistently, this Court and some other Courts have been following the principle that even upon detection of on-money receipts or unaccounted cash receipts, what can be brought to tax is the profit embedded in such receipts and not the entire receipts, themselves. If that

Radhe Developers, Rajkot vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, Rajkot

ITA 549/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No. 549 & 550/Rjt/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 (Hybrid Hearing) Radhe Developers Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1 . Office No. 47, Ankur Commercial Center, Opp. Income Tax Office, Amruta Swaminarayan Gurukul, Estate Building, Near Girnar Gondal Road, Rajkot Cinema, M G Road, Rajkot Rajkot-360001 Rajkot-360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfr3387E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147

Business Corner" developed by the assessee -firm, M/s Radhe Developers have been recovered from the material seized during the search operation - (i)Unaccounted (on-money) receipts against sale of units of the project "Business Corner 5.As details regarding unaccounted part of the aforementioned transactions pertaining to the assessee have been ... thus, be seen that consistently, this Court and some other Courts have been following the principle that even upon detection of on-money receipts or unaccounted cash receipts, what can be brought to tax is the profit embedded in such receipts and not the entire receipts, themselves. If that