← 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

Nilkanth Raojibhai Patel, Vadodara vs. The ITO, Ward-2, Intl. Taxn., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1995/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1995/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बनाम/ Nilkanth Raojibhai Patel Income Tax Officer Karmyog 1 Solarhome, Ward (2), International Vs. Opp. Ashweriya Flats, Taxation, Ahmedabad Vegetable Market Road, Ellora Park, Odhavpura, Vadodara, Gujarat - 390007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Bappp3651Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, Ar. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. Dr 02/04/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 04/04/2025 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad-13, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 11.08.2023 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. As Per Registry, There Was A Delay Of 39 Days In Filing Of This Appeal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Reason For The Delay Which, According To Him, Was Of 466 Days. It Has Been Submitted That The Assessee Is A Super Senior Citizen Aged 80 Years, Residing In Usa & That He Only Occasionally Visited His Native Place In India. The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Was Sent To His Email Account But He Was Not Regular In Accessing His Email

For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Sodhan, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 68

compliance made by the assessee. Therefore, the AO treated the entire investment of Rs.1,44,71,816/- in SBI Mutual Fund as undisclosed income of the assessee. Accordingly, the assessment was completed u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 29.12.2018 at total income of Rs.1,44,71,820/-. 4. Aggrieved