← 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

Bramvishma Data & Mailing Services Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward- 1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 240/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.240/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bramvishma Data & Mailing The Ito बनाम/ Services Pvt.Ltd. Ward-1(1)(2) V/S. C/O. Divyang Shah & Co.,Cas Ahmedabad – 380 015 201, 2Nd Floor, Devashish Complex Nr. Regenta Central Antarim Hotel, Off. C.G. Road Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaccb 6364 M अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Maulik Kansara, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Maulik Kansara, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 68

treated the said amount as unexplained cash credit under section 68. Further, the contract receipt of Rs.2,89,250/- was also treated as undisclosed income in the absence of return of income and any details submitted by the assessee. 4.2. Accordingly, the total income was assessed at Rs.78 ... facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,89,250/- as undisclosed income? 3. Further, the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw all or any ground of appeal. 7. During the course of hearing

Hemant Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr.CIT, Panchkula

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 206/Chd/2023 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Hemant Fabrics Pvt.Ltd., C-95, Mahendru Enclave, G.T.Karnal Road, New Delhi. Vs The Pcit, Panchkula. स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm2810N अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajay Jain, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp Hybrid Hearing Order The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (In Short ‘Cit') Dated 22.03.2023 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 In Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Assessee Has Taken Three Grounds Of Appeal, However Its Grievance Revolves Around A Single Issue Namely

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Jain, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

cryptic order. (d) The discrepancies found in cash, stock etc. could not have been unearthed without survey action and are in the nature of undisclosed income under Section 68/69/69A of the Act. In the absence of any explanation, tax was liable to be paid as per the provisions of section

Jivaram Magaji Chaoudhary, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle 7, Pune

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

ITA 1392/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1392/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jivaram Magaji Chaoudhary, Vs. Acit, Circle-7, Pune. Plot No.4, Road No.5, Snehdeep Palace, Tingrenagar, Pune- 411032. Pan : Aalpc3973B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri V. L. Jain Revenue By Shri Uma Shankar Prasad : Date Of Hearing : 26.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.03.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. There Is A Delay Of 48 Days In Filing Of The Present Appeal. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Along With An Affidavit. We Are Satisfied With The Explanation Of The Assessee That He Was Prevented By Reasonable

For Appellant: Shri V. L. Jain
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69BSection 69C

assessment year 2010-11 and while calculating short term capital gain on sale of fixed assets, the assessee claimed this undisclosed income as an expenditure by way of cost of acquisition for computation of capital gain during the period under consideration. According to the Department, the disclosure was required ... assessee as regards to unexplained advances of Rs 20058000 and completed the income tax assessment for Ay 2011-12 including the aforesaid amount as undisclosed income. 2.3 A sum of Rs 2.55 crores was seized by the department during the course of action under u/s 132 on 6/9/2010