← 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

Pragnesh Kantarya, Rajkot, Gujarat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Surendranagar, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 485/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 485/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Pragnesh Kantariya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Wd –1, (Prop. Of Vision Industies) Surendranagar, Income Tax Office, B2-1101, Shilpan Onyx, Gangotri Park Opp. Mela Medan, Main Road, University Road, Surendranagar-363001 Rajkot – 360005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bbspk0467P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri K. L. Solanki, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69A

intimated that in absence of reply, the cash credit in the bank account Pragnesh kantariya during the relevant Assessment Year will be treated as undisclosed income during the year and will be taxed accordingly. But no response has been furnished by the assessee till date. The assessee was given opportunities

Pramod Kumar Choudhary, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

decision was vitiated would be difficult to say. Moreover the Income-tax Officer had stated that the payment which was stated to be undisclosed income relevant for the assessment year 1991- 92 could have been made during the financial year 1990-91 relevant to the assessment year ... into consideration. In the affidavit-in-reply, it is the say of the respondent himself that the said payment which is stated to be undisclosed income relevant for the assessment year 1991-92 could have been made during the financial year 1990-91 relevant to the assessment year

Mohd. Asfand Akhtar, Kanpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 138/LKW/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow09 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Jaiswal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 250

where he had got the money to take care of them. Accordingly, the ld. AO was correct in assuming that there was undisclosed income that had not been brought into the books and estimating an addition on this account. He, therefore, prayed that it may be confirmed. 6. We have

Sadashiv Krishnappa Namde, Jalna vs. ITO Ward 1, Jalna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 999/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. /Ita No.999/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vs Ito, Ward 1, Sadashiv Krishnappa Namde, Jalna Brahman Galli, Nandi Mandir, Kadrabad, Jalna- 431203 Maharashtra Pan-Anrpn9966G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 208Section 234Section 234ASection 250

facts and in the prevailing circumstances of the case and in law, ld A.O has erred in making addition of Rs. 1263484/-as undisclosed income, without providing the necessary evidences to the appellant, is violation of the natural justice, the assessment order cannot satisfy it legal validity and the assessment

Ankit Agarwal, Barakar, West Burdwan vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Asansol

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 945/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 250Section 263

Principal CIT erred in directing the Ld. A.O. to add back the entire cash deposits of Rs. 1,83,28,340/- as undisclosed income of the appellant without verifying the documents filed during 263 proceedings, even though the same were filed manually as well as online. 2. That the appellant

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai vs. Subbiah Nadar Jegatheesan, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 603/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:603/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Subbiah Nadar Jegatheesan, Tax, Vs. 3, Ml Theri Road, Keeraikaranthattu, Central Circle -2, Mahadevankulam, Madurai. Tirunelveli – 627 657. [Pan:Abxpj-7672-F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025

For Appellant: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri. R. Venkata Raman, C.A
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 68Section 69A

course of such proceedings, no incriminating material was unearthed which would suggest that the cash deposits amounting to Rs.4,75,43,171/- represented undisclosed income of the assessee. It was further submitted that the Revenue had neither alleged nor demonstrated that the earlier cash withdrawals had been diverted or utilised ... there is no material on record indicating that the cash deposits made into the bank accounts during the relevant assessment year represent income constituted undisclosed income of the assessee. 32. We note that the assessee has sufficiently discharged the initial burden of proof by furnishing a plausible explanation supported

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Aachman Vanijya Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue and cross-objection by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 385/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 1ISection 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viia)

during the search and other material which would include income declared in the returns, if any, furnished by the assessee as well as the undisclosed income. However, where during the search no incriminating material is found, in the case of a completed or unabated assessment, the only remedy available ... decision is extracted herein below : "20. In our view, a plain reading of s. 158BB(1) of the Act does not contemplate computing of undisclosed income solely on the basis of a statement recorded during the search. The words evidence found as a result of search' would not take within

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Jasmine Kaur Kochar, Delhi

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

ITA 401/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(1)

time of marriage or other occasion, then, it cannot be said that the diamond studded in the said jewellery were out of the undisclosed income of the appellant. It is also well settled law that where gross weight of jewellery disclosed in regular returns was in excess of gross weight

Jawahal Lal Gulati, 147/B, Yamuna Enclave, Panipat, Haryana vs. Pr. CIT, Rohtak

ITA 3549/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Madhumita Royjawahar Lal Gulati Vs. Pr.Cit, 147/B, Yamuna Enclave, Gurgaon Panipat, Haryana – 110038 Haryana – 132103 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaypg9251D Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. J.B. Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Dayainder Singh, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 68Section 69

stated either in the pre-amended or in the post amended provision of Section 115BBE of the Act that where the assessee surrendered the undisclosed income during search action for relevant assessment year the tax rate has to be charged as per provision of Section 115BBE

Tremendous Mining and Minerals Pvt Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

ITA 157/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2012-13 Tremendous Mining & Vs Dcit, Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-3, Cabin No.-1, 1205, New Delhi. 89-Hemkunth Chamber, Nehru Place, New Delhi – 110 019. Pan: Aacct8840N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashwini Kumar, Ca & Shri Ankur Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.07.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.01.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. First Appellate Authority Or ‘The Ld. Faa’, For Short) In Appeal No.Cit(A), Delhi-23/10303/2019-20 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Dated 24.12.2019 Passed U/S 148 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Dcit, Central Circle- 3, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Ashwini Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

Therefore, considering that the appellant has been providing the facility to route these financial transactions, the 2% of the total amount is treated as undisclosed income of the appellant, not shown in Its turn of income. This comes to Rs. 1,47,00,000/-. 7.11 Since the details have been

ITO Ward 4(4), New Delhi vs. Bharatpuria Finance & Investment Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, order of the CIT(A) on the issues raised before us by the Revenue in its appeal are upheld and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3513/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.3513/ िद"ी /2019 (िन.व. 2013-14) Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), R. No. 385A, 3Rd Floor, Cr Building, Ip Estate, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 110002 बनाम Vs. Bharatpuria Finance & Investment Ltd., C-4/164, Keshav Puram, Delhi 110035 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aaacb-3662-N Assessee By : Shri Ravi Saini, Managing Director Department By: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 09/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Cit(A)') Dated 23.01.2019, For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Emanating From Records Are: The Assessee Is A Non Banking Finance Company. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year Declaring Nil Income & Claiming Current Year Loss Of Rs.4,02,609/-.

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Saini, Managing DirectorFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

appeal has assailed findings of the CIT(A) in deleting addition of Rs.4,50,00,000/- made u/s. 68 of the Act being undisclosed income. A perusal of the assessment order reveals that no submissions/detailes were filed by the assessee before the AO. In the absence of any reply

Himgiri Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 11(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7080/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarhimgiri Realtors Private Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward 11 (3), Flat No.818, 8Th Floor, New Delhi. Devika Tower 6, Nehru Place, New Deli – 110 019. (Pan : Aabch6093E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri I.P. Bansal, Advocate Shri Vivek Bansal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-35, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 28.08.2018 For Assessment Year 2012-13 Raising Following Revised Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. That Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Impugned Appeal Order Is Bad In Law, Illegal & In Violation Of Rudimentary Principal Of Contemporary Jurisprudence.

For Appellant: Shri I.P. Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 2(22)(e)Section 68

investment made by the applicant actually emanated from the coffers of the assessee so as to enable it to be treated as the undisclosed income of the assessee. 4. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in fact

M/S. A & A Accessories, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2614/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234B

circumstances of the case, the CIT(Appeals) has erred on law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 2,26,438/- as undisclosed income on account of alleged expense made out of books of accounts on account of Negative Cash. 3. That in view of the facts

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. New India City Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 4804/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)Section 68

present departmental appeal is with regard to addition of Rs.1,97,68,500/- made by Ld. AO on account of as alleged undisclosed income in respect of share capital and share premium u/s 68 of the Act. Ld. AO has discussed the above issue at Para-2 and 3 Page ... issue in the present departmental appeal is with regard to Advance against project of Rs. 15,93,14,500/- by treating it as alleged undisclosed income of the assessee under section 68 of the Act. Ld. AO has discussed this issue at Para 4 Page 4-7. Ld. CIT Appeal

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Muzaffarpur vs. Nandkumar Prasad Sah, Saraiyganj Road, Muzaffarpur

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

ITA 248/PAT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 69A

153A is linked with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A. The object of section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Trilok Dewan, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 303/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

share transactions. Ld. AO alleged that these were the details of bogus share purchases / sales which were arranged by the assessee to convert its undisclosed income in the shape of LTCG, which is in fact bogus LTCG. Ld. AO noted that in search and post search proceedings, thorough examination ... with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Trilok Dewan, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 302/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

share transactions. Ld. AO alleged that these were the details of bogus share purchases / sales which were arranged by the assessee to convert its undisclosed income in the shape of LTCG, which is in fact bogus LTCG. Ld. AO noted that in search and post search proceedings, thorough examination ... with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Vaibhav Banka, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 301/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

share transactions. Ld. AO alleged that these were the details of bogus share purchases / sales which were arranged by the assessee to convert its undisclosed income in the shape of LTCG, which is in fact bogus LTCG. Ld. AO noted that in search and post search proceedings, thorough examination ... with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Sarita Dewan, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 300/JPR/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

share transactions. Ld. AO alleged that these were the details of bogus share purchases / sales which were arranged by the assessee to convert its undisclosed income in the shape of LTCG, which is in fact bogus LTCG. Ld. AO noted that in search and post search proceedings, thorough examination ... with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income

DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Sarita Dewan, Sikar

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 299/JPR/2025[2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jul 2025

share transactions. Ld. AO alleged that these were the details of bogus share purchases / sales which were arranged by the assessee to convert its undisclosed income in the shape of LTCG, which is in fact bogus LTCG. Ld. AO noted that in search and post search proceedings, thorough examination ... with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income