← 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -2, Coimbatore vs. Sri Maheswary Granites (P) Ltd, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3054/CHNY/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3054/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner Of Sri Maheswary Granites (P) Income Tax, Vs. Ltd., Central Circle – 2, Old No.115, New No.84, Coimbatore Bashyakarlu Road West, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore Pan: Aafcs 9118K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. V. Aswathy, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M.C.R. Mohan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2026

For Appellant: Ms. V. Aswathy, JCITFor Respondent: Shri K.M.C.R. Mohan, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

After the CIT(A) order in quantum assessment, the AO levied penalty u/s.271AAB(1)(c) of the Act being 30% of the undisclosed income of Rs.2,32,39,276/- (amount sustained by the CIT(A)). 6. Aggrieved by the order of the AO imposing penalty u/s.271AAB ... Emerald Meadows is a non-speaking order. :- 13 -: 9. Conclusion In the present case, the assessment order clearly records the facts of search, undisclosed income detected, non-admission/non-substantiation under 132(4), and initiation of penalty u/s 271AAB(1)(c). There is clear application of mind by AO. Hence, notice

Param Propertt Devloper, Ambernath vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Thane

ITA 3243/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarit(Ss)A/3241/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17) It(Ss)A/3242/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) It(Ss)A/3243/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2020-21) Param Property Developers V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 30, Jivandeep बनाम Income Tax, Central Circle Apartment, Station Road, Ambarnath(E), Thane 421501, Maharashtra 2,Thane, Ashar It Park, 6Th Floor, Wagale Industrial Estate, Thane- 400 604, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aalfp9248G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Pride Infrastructure It(Ss)A/3309/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) It(Ss)A/3310/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) V/S. Assistant Commissioner Of Plot No. 34, Ketan Bhavan, बनाम Income Tax, Central Circle Suryoday Chs Ltd., Station Road, Ambarnath(E), Thane 421 501, Maharashtra 2,Thane, Ashar It Park, 6Th Floor, Wagale Industrial Estate, Thane- 400 604, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aamfp3255G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी Page | 2

Section 132Section 143(3)

basis of books of account or other documents not produced in the course of original assessment but found in the course of search and undisclosed income or undisclosed property discovered in the course of search. It has thus been held that in case of completed assessments, the assessment u/s. 153A