← 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

Ganadhish Gnp, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3966/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Bleita No. 3965/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2020-21) Ganadhish Gnp Dcit, Circle-6(1), Mumbai Shop No. 1203, 12Th Floor, Rupa Solitaire, Building No. A-I, Vs Sector-I, Millennium Business Park, Mahape Navi Mumbai- 400710. Pan: Aapfg 1164 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 4481/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2021-22) Dcit, Circle-6(1), Ganadhish Gnp Mumbai Shop No. 1203, 12Th Floor, Rupa Solitaire, Building No. A- Vs I, Sector-I, Millennium Business Park, Mahape Navi Mumbai-400710. Pan: Aapfg 1164 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi & Aadnya BhandariFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)

claiming expenses at 80% of unaccounted business receipts of Rs. 3,79,07,014/- and offered net amount of Rs. 75,81,403/- as undisclosed income pursuant to search. The said undisclosed income is offered yearwise considering all the seized documents. The grievance of the assessee is that in contradistinction ... direct evidence co-relating the expenditure and a reasonable estimate on the basis of seized documents to be made while computing the undisclosed income pursuant to search. The following observation of the jurisdictional Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Prime Developer vs. DCIT – ITA 175 to 178/M/2010