← All Phrases

“undisclosed income”

Search & SeizureSection 153ASection 153A9,092 judgments

The decision most relied on for undisclosed income is CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573), cited in 3,235 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on undisclosed income

CIT v. Kabul Chawla
380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court
3,235
citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

Additions for alleged bogus purchases should be restricted to the profit element, not the entire turnover. The profit element is often estimated at 12.5% of the purported bogus purchases.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Harjeev Aggarwal
290 CTR 263 · 2016 · High Court
583
citing judgments

Assessment based solely on a statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act requires the statement to be relatable to incriminating material or evidence found during the search, especially when considering Section 158BB(1) which restricts computation of undisclosed income to evidence found during search.

CIT v. Anil Kumar Bhatia
352 ITR 493 · 2013 · High Court
537
citing judgments

Section 153A can be invoked to reassess income for all years under consideration prior to a search, even if returns for those years were processed under Section 143(1)(a). The Assessing Officer has the power to reassess total income in such cases without fetters.

CIT v. P. Mohanakala
291 ITR 278 · 2007 · Supreme Court
525
citing judgments

The Supreme Court emphasized that in the absence of concrete rebuttal by the assessee, circumstantial evidence holds significant weight, applying the doctrine of preponderance of probability, particularly when assessing undisclosed income or unexplained cash credits.

Society v. UOI
394 ITR 220 · 2017 · Supreme Court
493
citing judgments

Uncorroborated loose papers or documents found during a search operation have no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for determining undisclosed income. Additions based on such material require independent evidence to establish trustworthiness and a direct link to the assessee.

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. Gurinder Singh Bawa
386 ITR 483 · 2016 · High Court
416
citing judgments

If no incriminating material is found during a search operation regarding a particular issue, then no addition can be made concerning that issue in an assessment under section 153A of the Income-tax Act.

Judgments citing undisclosed income

Paul Dhinakaran, Chennai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-391), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the for A

ITA 1067/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1067/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Paul Dhinakaran, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 7, Jeevarathinam Nagar, Adyar, Income Tax, Chennai 600 020. V. Central Circle 3(1), Chennai. [Pan: Aabpd8489M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

were within his knowledge and no paper or document was found to indicate that this jewellery belonged to the appellant and that it was undisclosed income of the assessment year 2006-07. In a search operation, no scope is left with the tax department to make addition on subjective guess ... failed to consider Indian customs and social realities where accumulation of jewellery over years, especially as "sreedhan," is common and not indicative of undisclosed income. The affluence of assessee’s family, with a socially prominent status and worldwide recognition in their Christian ministry, further substantiate the legitimacy of their assets