← 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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Agra vs. Pegasus Agro Industries Private Limited, Agra

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 127/AGR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.127/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Dcit M/S Peggasus Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhawan (Formerly Known As Bnr Overseas P. Ltd. Sanjay Place 503 Space Tower-2, Near Holy Public School Vs. Agra - 282001 Sikandra, Agra "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aagcb-5997-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 245D(4)Section 68

making cash deposit in the account of Shri Maa Bhagwati Enterprises. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), in para 5.6, rendered a factual finding that undisclosed income in the hands of 6 applicants including Shri Maa Bhagwati Enterprises was suitably taxed in order passed by Interim Board of Settlement-VII, Chennai

ACIT., Central Circle, Aligarh vs. M/S Radharani Jewellers Ltd, Delhi

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 23/AGR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.23/Agr/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Acit Central Circle M/S Radharani Jewellers Limited बनाम/ 5882/4, 2Nd Floor, Block No.4, Aaykar Bhawan, Sanjay Place Vs. Agra - 282002. Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecr-3358-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Kanpur Dated 23-12-2021 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Acit, Central Circle, Agra (Ao) U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 31-12-2019. The Sole Issue In The Appeal Is Addition Of Cash Deposits During Demonetization Period. 2. The Ld. Cit-Dr Advanced Arguments & Supported The Findings Of Ld. Ao Whereas Ld. Ar Also Advanced Arguments & Supported The Findings Of Ld. Cit(A) In The Impugned Order. Having Heard Rival

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

month of October and November, 2015 to this year, Ld. AO quantified estimated excess sales for Rs.10.96 Crores and added the same as undisclosed income u/s 68 which would be taxable at higher rates as specified u/s 115BBE of the Act. The working of the same has been tabulated

ACIT Circle-2(1), Gwalior vs. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Gwalior

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 23/AGR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.16/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta Acit - Circle-2 बनाम/ F-11, Harishankar Puram Gwalior Vs. Gwalior 474 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Tan/Gir No. Aclpg-8972-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.23/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit Circle-2 Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta बनाम/ Gwalior F-11, Harishankar Puram Vs. Gwalior 474 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Tan/Gir No. Aclpg-8972-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain (Cit) – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain (CIT) – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

very basis of surrender by the assessee which was already offered in the return of income. The assessee honored his statement by incorporating undisclosed income found recorded in various incriminating material / loose papers for taxation and offered the same to tax. Adding the same again would tantamount to double taxation ... adding the same again would amount to double taxation which is not permissible under the law. The assessee honored his statement by incorporating undisclosed income found recorded in various incriminating material / loose papers for taxation and offered the same to tax. Further, upon perusal of LPS-5, Page No.7

Ashok Kumar Gupta, Gwalior vs. ACIT, Gwalior

Appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 16/AGR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.16/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta Acit - Circle-2 बनाम/ F-11, Harishankar Puram Gwalior Vs. Gwalior 474 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Tan/Gir No. Aclpg-8972-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.23/Agr/2020 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit Circle-2 Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta बनाम/ Gwalior F-11, Harishankar Puram Vs. Gwalior 474 002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Tan/Gir No. Aclpg-8972-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain (Cit) – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain (CIT) – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

very basis of surrender by the assessee which was already offered in the return of income. The assessee honored his statement by incorporating undisclosed income found recorded in various incriminating material / loose papers for taxation and offered the same to tax. Adding the same again would tantamount to double taxation ... adding the same again would amount to double taxation which is not permissible under the law. The assessee honored his statement by incorporating undisclosed income found recorded in various incriminating material / loose papers for taxation and offered the same to tax. Further, upon perusal of LPS-5, Page No.7

M/S Agroha Ornaments, Gwalior vs. ACIT., Central, Gwalior

ITA 135/AGR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.135/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Agroha Ornaments Acit (Central) बनाम/ Solid Gold Plaza, Sarafa Bazar Gwalior Vs. Lashkar, Gwalior 474011 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abgfa-1001-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.586/Agr/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Acit (Central) M/S Agroha Ornaments बनाम/ Gwalior Solid Gold Plaza, Sarafa Bazar Vs. Lashkar, Gwalior 474011 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abgfa-1001-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashok Vijayawargiya (Ca) – Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Vijayawargiya (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69A

emphasized the fact the while recording statement during search and seizure, no attempt should be made to obtain confession as to the undisclosed income. 6. The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Naresh Kumar Agarwal (53 Taxmann.com 306), as cited by Ld. AR, held