← 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

Balkrishan Kyal, Visakhapatnam vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2565/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2023-24 Anurag Kyal………..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 122/1R, Satyendra Nath Mazumder Sarani, Hazra, Kol-26. [Pan: Agipk4906H] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata ..…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2023-24 Balkrishan Kyal……..…..……….…………………….……….……….……Appellant 30/15/138, Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530020. [Pan: Abdpk2892E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 29, 2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

been done. The ld. AR further submits that circumstances clearly reveal that there being no fault from the part of the assessee in declaring undisclosed income and payment of taxes voluntarily without there bring any pressure or caution or any question put to him the penalty out to be levied ... respect of the assets and valuable found. We further find that this being so then the search party would have definitely declared the undisclosed income in the statement u/s 132(4) and the same would have triggered the amount of penalty leviable @30% and not 60%. Going over the discussion

Rahul Kyal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2564/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2023-24 Rishi Kyal……..……..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 161/1, M.G. Road, 2Nd Floor, Room No.41, Hazra, Kol-26. [Pan: Aftpk7464G] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2023-24 Rahul Kyal…..……..…..……….………………………...……….……….……Appellant 122/1R, Satyendra Nath Majumdar Sarani, Tollygunge, Kalighat, Kol-700026. [Pan: Aghpk1359F] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 13, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 29, 2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

been done. The ld. AR further submits that circumstances clearly reveal that there being no fault from the part of the assessee in declaring undisclosed income and payment of taxes voluntarily without there bring any pressure or caution or any question put to him the penalty out to be levied ... respect of the assets and valuable found. We further find that this being so then the search party would have definitely declared the undisclosed income in the statement u/s 132(4) and the same would have triggered the amount of penalty leviable @ 30% and not 60%. Going over the discussion

Anurag Kyal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2563/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2023-24 Anurag Kyal………..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 122/1R, Satyendra Nath Mazumder Sarani, Hazra, Kol-26. [Pan: Agipk4906H] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata ..…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2023-24 Balkrishan Kyal……..…..……….…………………….……….……….……Appellant 30/15/138, Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh-530020. [Pan: Abdpk2892E] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manoj Kumar Pati, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 12, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 29, 2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

been done. The ld. AR further submits that circumstances clearly reveal that there being no fault from the part of the assessee in declaring undisclosed income and payment of taxes voluntarily without there bring any pressure or caution or any question put to him the penalty out to be levied ... respect of the assets and valuable found. We further find that this being so then the search party would have definitely declared the undisclosed income in the statement u/s 132(4) and the same would have triggered the amount of penalty leviable @30% and not 60%. Going over the discussion

Rishi Kyal, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 2562/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jan 2026AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2023-24 Rishi Kyal……..……..…..……….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 161/1, M.G. Road, 2Nd Floor, Room No.41, Hazra, Kol-26. [Pan: Aftpk7464G] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Assessment Year: 2023-24 Rahul Kyal…..……..…..……….………………………...……….……….……Appellant 122/1R, Satyendra Nath Majumdar Sarani, Tollygunge, Kalighat, Kol-700026. [Pan: Aghpk1359F] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata.….…………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. B. Chakraborthy, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 13, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 29, 2026

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

been done. The ld. AR further submits that circumstances clearly reveal that there being no fault from the part of the assessee in declaring undisclosed income and payment of taxes voluntarily without there bring any pressure or caution or any question put to him the penalty out to be levied ... respect of the assets and valuable found. We further find that this being so then the search party would have definitely declared the undisclosed income in the statement u/s 132(4) and the same would have triggered the amount of penalty leviable @ 30% and not 60%. Going over the discussion

Rajesh B, Jain As Legal of Bhanwarlal M. Jain, Mumbai vs. Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1938/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Ι.Τ.Α. No.1938/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1937/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1940/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1939/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1941/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1942/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1936/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Rajesh B. Jain As Legal Heir Of Bhanwarlal Jain, 171, 17Th Floor, Silver Arch, Petit Hall Compound, Nepeansea Road, Mumbai - 400006 Pan: Aafpj1924R Assessee -अपीलार्थी / Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward-19(1)(1), Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400012. Revenue - प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent : Assessee By : Shri Madhur Agarwal, Adv, Shri Fenil Bhat & Shri Sucheck Anchaliya, Ca

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 143(1)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

levy of penalty in a case where search has been initiated on or after 1st July, 2012. The new section provides that,- (a) If undisclosed income is admitted during the course of search, the taxpayer will be liable for penalty at the rate of 10% of undisclosed income subject ... fulfillment of certain conditions. (b) If undisclosed income is not admitted during the course of search but disclosed in the return of income filed after the search, the taxpayer will be liable for penalty at the rate of 20% of undisclosed income subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions