← 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

Tejender Pal Singh Sahni, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result ITA No. 1147/JP/2024 (A

ITA 1152/JPR/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. C. M. Birla, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69Section 80C

complete the assessment as a regular assessment proceeding and each and every issue arising from the return of income as well as any undisclosed income detected during the course of search would be subject matter of assessment. There is no dispute that the assessee has disclosed the investment of Rs.3

Tejender Pal Singh Sahni, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

In the result ITA No. 1147/JP/2024 (A

ITA 1147/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Mr. C. M. Birla, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144Section 153(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 69Section 80C

complete the assessment as a regular assessment proceeding and each and every issue arising from the return of income as well as any undisclosed income detected during the course of search would be subject matter of assessment. There is no dispute that the assessee has disclosed the investment

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Kailash Ramavatar Goenka, Ahmedabad

ITA 67/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 132Section 153A

details such as dates, amounts, and noting in the diaries maintained by group members. The AO concluded that these cash receipts represented unaccounted and undisclosed income of the assessee, as the source of the cash remained unexplained. The AO added these receipts in income of respective assessment years as undisclosed

Subhashchandra Keshavlal Barot, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Intl. Taxn. -1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 550/AHD/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250

said transactions and, therefore, made addition of the Assessment Year: 2010-11 Subhashchandra Keshavlal Barot vs. ITO Page 3 of 4 said amount as undisclosed income related to undisclosed receipt of sale of shares. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before

Sadbhav Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(3), Ahmedabad

ITA 235/AHD/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarsr. No. Appellant Respondent 1-7 It(Ss)A.No./ Asstt.Year 170 To 175 & 235/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 13 To 2018-19 Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedbad. Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. 8-14 183 To 189/Ahd/2021 Asst. Year 2012- 14 To 2018-19 Pan : Aadcs 0852 Q Dcit, Cent.Cir.1(3) Ahmedabad. Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. Nr. Havmour Restaurant Navrangpura Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By Shri Dhinal Shah, Ar Revenue By: Shri H. Phani Raju, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 18/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 10/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench: The Above Cross-Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against The Consolidated Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) 11, Ahmedabad All Dated 04.08.2021 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act" For Short) For The

For Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 69ASection 80I

that would amount to double addition in respect of the same amount. - [CIT v. Golani Brothers (2018) 300 CTR 245 (Bom)] 1.5 Once the undisclosed income had been determined in the hands of the assessee, it proved that there was availability of funds with the assessee, which, in turn, could ... said to have been utilized for meeting unexplained expenditure. In view thereof, the telescoping of undisclosed income against undisclosed expenditure was allowed and addition of balance net undisclosed expenditure was made in the hands of assessee.-Vide Paras Rice Mills v. Asstt. CIT2015 TaxPub(DT) 2050 (ChdB-Trib). Also

Mr. Chittaranjan Trimbak Gaikwad, Pune vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 759/PUN/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri B.C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

Explanations to section 271(1)(c) are rebuttable and does not, ipso- facto, result in automatic imposition of penalty. The fact that the entire 'undisclosed income was declared by the appellant in the statement recorded during search and the same was also disclosed in the return filed pursuant to notice

Geethika Enterprises, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(4), Hyderabad

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1240/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1239 & 1240/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15) Geethika Enterprises Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 11(4) Pan:Aamfg5506F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate A Harish राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Aluru Venkata Rao, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 10/01/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate A HarishFor Respondent: : Shri Aluru Venkata Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 221(1)Section 271(1)(c)

Rs.38,10,000/- based on the mistake of date on the purchase voucher by treating this purchase of oil as unexplained investment being undisclosed income. However, the assessee has duly recorded all the transactions of purchase and sale in the books of account. He has referred to the confirmation

Geethika Enterprises, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(4), Hyderabad

ITA 1239/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice- & Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.1239 & 1240/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Advocate A Harish
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69C

Rs.38,10,000/- based on the mistake of date on the purchase voucher by treating this purchase of oil as unexplained investment being undisclosed income. However, the assessee has duly recorded all the transactions of purchase and sale in the books of account. He has referred to the confirmation ... tanker on 27.11.2013 without having received the stocks from the sellers and that oil stock was acquired by the firm from out of undisclosed income Rs.38,09,524/-. 3. It is submitted that the assessee firm having came into existence on 06.11.2013 discontinued the business in about 21.5 months

Pradyumna Agros Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1033/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1033/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Pradyumna Agro Private Vs. Acit Limited Central Circle-2(4) Hyderabad Hyderabad [Pan : Aajcp4282H] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.V.Prasad & Shri K.S.Rajendra Kumar, Ar Shri Srinath Sadanala, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 10/01/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.09.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Pertaining To A.Y.2020-21 On The Following Grounds : 1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Hyderabad Is Erroneous & Opposed To The Facts Of The Case & Law.

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad &
Section 132Section 153CSection 153C(1)Section 69

arguments of the appellant that the Assessing Officer has not recorded satisfaction as required under law and further, the seized material does not indicate undisclosed income of the appellant for the A.Y.2020-21, is devoid of merit and therefore, rejected the arguments of the appellant on the legal issue. The relevant ... found during the course of search in the form of loose sheets that nowhere in the satisfaction note, the Assessing Officer indicated the 13 undisclosed income pertains to the appellant for the A.Y.2020- 21. Even in the seized material, there is no specific date of payment of cash to link

Poonam Marwaha, Amritsar vs. ACIT DCIT Cen Cir, Amritsar

ITA 306/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 44ASection 69

that assessee could not establish genuineness of transactions to prove that it had not indulged in any dubious share transactions meant to account for undisclosed income under garb of long term capital gain (LTCG) to claim exemption under section 10 (38) was based on a proposal given by Assessing Officer

Kumar Suman Singh, Patna vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 216/PAT/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.212 To 216/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 1998-99 & 2001-02 To 2004-05 Kumar Suman Singh………………………..……………………………...……Appellant F-62, P.C. Colony, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar – 800020. [Pan: Aihps1976L] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna…………....….…......……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rinku Singh, Cit – Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2025 Order Per Bench: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For Different Assessment Years I.E 1998-99 & 2001-02 To 2004-05 Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Mostly Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 132 Days In Filing The Instant Appeals. The Assessee Has Submitted Applications For Condonation Of Delay Citing Reasonable Grounds. After Considering The Averments Made In The Applications, We Condone The Delay.

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 263

form of movable and immoveable properties were discovered which was alleged to have been unaccounted income of the assessee. The investigation revealed significant undisclosed income from activities related to examinations and recruitment process such as pre-medical exams, Bank P.O exams etc. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153A ... notices were issued to the assessee requiring to file returns. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the relevant year by determining substantial undisclosed income. Subsequent to the assessment, it was found that the assessee had used multiple alias names such as Indrajeet Kumar (Singh) and Ranjit Singh. Later

Kumar Suman Singh, Patna vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 215/PAT/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.212 To 216/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 1998-99 & 2001-02 To 2004-05 Kumar Suman Singh………………………..……………………………...……Appellant F-62, P.C. Colony, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar – 800020. [Pan: Aihps1976L] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna…………....….…......……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rinku Singh, Cit – Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2025 Order Per Bench: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For Different Assessment Years I.E 1998-99 & 2001-02 To 2004-05 Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Mostly Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 132 Days In Filing The Instant Appeals. The Assessee Has Submitted Applications For Condonation Of Delay Citing Reasonable Grounds. After Considering The Averments Made In The Applications, We Condone The Delay.

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 263

form of movable and immoveable properties were discovered which was alleged to have been unaccounted income of the assessee. The investigation revealed significant undisclosed income from activities related to examinations and recruitment process such as pre-medical exams, Bank P.O exams etc. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153A ... notices were issued to the assessee requiring to file returns. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the relevant year by determining substantial undisclosed income. Subsequent to the assessment, it was found that the assessee had used multiple alias names such as Indrajeet Kumar (Singh) and Ranjit Singh. Later

Kumar Suman Singh, Patna vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

ITA 214/PAT/2023[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

form of movable and immoveable properties were discovered which was alleged to have been unaccounted income of the assessee. The investigation revealed significant undisclosed income from activities related to examinations and recruitment process such as pre-medical exams, Bank P.O exams etc. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153A ... notices were issued to the assessee requiring to file returns. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the relevant year by determining substantial undisclosed income. Subsequent to the assessment, it was found that the assessee had used multiple alias names such as Indrajeet Kumar (Singh) and Ranjit Singh. Later

Kumar Suman Singh, Patna vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Patna

ITA 213/PAT/2023[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2025AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 263

form of movable and immoveable properties were discovered which was alleged to have been unaccounted income of the assessee. The investigation revealed significant undisclosed income from activities related to examinations and recruitment process such as pre-medical exams, Bank P.O exams etc. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153A ... notices were issued to the assessee requiring to file returns. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the relevant year by determining substantial undisclosed income. Subsequent to the assessment, it was found that the assessee had used multiple alias names such as Indrajeet Kumar (Singh) and Ranjit Singh. Later

Kumar Suman Singh, Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 212/PAT/2023[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Jan 2025AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. Nos.212 To 216/Pat/2023 Assessment Years: 1998-99 & 2001-02 To 2004-05 Kumar Suman Singh………………………..……………………………...……Appellant F-62, P.C. Colony, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar – 800020. [Pan: Aihps1976L] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna…………....….…......……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rinku Singh, Cit – Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : December 17, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 09, 2025 Order Per Bench: These Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For Different Assessment Years I.E 1998-99 & 2001-02 To 2004-05 Against Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In These Appeals Are Mostly Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. At The Outset, We Find That There Is A Delay Of 132 Days In Filing The Instant Appeals. The Assessee Has Submitted Applications For Condonation Of Delay Citing Reasonable Grounds. After Considering The Averments Made In The Applications, We Condone The Delay.

Section 132(1)Section 153ASection 250Section 263

form of movable and immoveable properties were discovered which was alleged to have been unaccounted income of the assessee. The investigation revealed significant undisclosed income from activities related to examinations and recruitment process such as pre-medical exams, Bank P.O exams etc. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 153A ... notices were issued to the assessee requiring to file returns. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for the relevant year by determining substantial undisclosed income. Subsequent to the assessment, it was found that the assessee had used multiple alias names such as Indrajeet Kumar (Singh) and Ranjit Singh. Later

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Zari Silk (India) Pvt. Ltd., Narayan Singh Circle, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 693/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Jan 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma, CA &
Section 133ASection 143

value of stock as per book and as per physical verification at the time of survey u/s 133A of the IT Act, 1961 as undisclosed income. While confirming the said addition of Rs.375913/-, the Id CIT (A) did not accepted submission of the appellant that the said difference is very

Zari Silk (India) Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and that of the

ITA 631/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Him The Assessment Order Passed By Dcit, Circle-2, Jaipur [ For Short Ao ] U/S 143 (3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [ For Short

For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 143

value of stock as per book and as per physical verification at the time of survey u/s 133A of the IT Act, 1961 as undisclosed income. While confirming the said addition of Rs. 375913/-, the Id CIT (A) did not accepted submission of the appellant that the said difference ... value of stock as per book and as per physical verification at the time of survey u/s 133A of the IT Act, 1961 as undisclosed income. While confirming the said addition of Rs. 375913/-, the Id CIT (A) did not accepted submission of the appellant that the said difference

Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 434/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.434/Ahd/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel The Acit बनाम / V/S. Circle-3(3) 2, Parivar Society Part-2 Near Premchand Nagar Row-House, Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ahmedabad – 380 015 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Adrpp 8846 K अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Arises Out Of The Order Dated 09/01/2024 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)"] Confirming The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ao") Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act") For The Assessment Year 2017-18.

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 68

failed to furnish details of landholding, sale bills, and expenses. 2. 3. Consequently, the AO treated the entire amount of Rs.36,88,500/- as undisclosed income under Section 68 of the Act. ITA No.434/Ahd/2024 Yatinbhai Pramukhbhai Patel vs. ACIT Asst. Year: 2017-18 3 3. The assessee filed an appeal ... deposits during the demonetization period. The AO, however, proceeded to make an addition of Rs.36,88,500/- by treating the declared agricultural income as undisclosed income. As per CBDT Instruction No. 20/2015, the AO cannot expand the scope of scrutiny without obtaining prior approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income

Natraj Construction Co., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 775/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.17,00,45,583/- in respect of contract receipt which remained unexplained and thereby treated as undisclosed income. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs.1,90,22,846/- in respect of source of investments in time deposits which remained unexplained and added the same

Natraj Construction Co., Mehsana vs. The ACIT, Circle Gandhinagar, Gandhinagar

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 774/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.17,00,45,583/- in respect of contract receipt which remained unexplained and thereby treated as undisclosed income. The Assessing Officer also made addition of Rs.1,90,22,846/- in respect of source of investments in time deposits which remained unexplained and added the same