← 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

Sg Wind Farm Pvt. Ltd., Tirupur vs. DCIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1229/CHNY/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1227/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1228/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1229/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1230/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Sg Wind Farm Private Limited Dcit बनाम/ Vs. 21, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-3 Palladam, Tirupur-641 664. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aarcs-5303-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 56

other words, there will be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six AYs "in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax". iv. Although Section 153 A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence ... assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment

Sg Wind Faarm Pvt. Ltd., Tirupur vs. DCIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1228/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1227/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1228/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1229/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1230/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Sg Wind Farm Private Limited Dcit बनाम/ Vs. 21, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-3 Palladam, Tirupur-641 664. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aarcs-5303-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 56

other words, there will be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six AYs "in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax". iv. Although Section 153 A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence ... assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment

Sg Wind Farm Pvt. Ltd., Tirupur vs. DCIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1227/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1227/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1228/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1229/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.1230/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Sg Wind Farm Private Limited Dcit बनाम/ Vs. 21, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-3 Palladam, Tirupur-641 664. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aarcs-5303-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 56

other words, there will be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six AYs "in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax". iv. Although Section 153 A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence ... assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment

Palladam Krishnasamy Ganeshwar, Tirupur vs. DCIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1222/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1222/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1223/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1224/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1225/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Palladam Krishnasamy Ganeshwar Dcit बनाम/ 21,Shri Ganesa Textiles, Pollachi Road, Central Circle-3 Vs. Palladam, Tirupur-641 664. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adfpg-6476-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओर से/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153CSection 69

other words, there will be only one assessment order in respect of each of the six AYs "in which both the disclosed and the undisclosed income would be brought to tax". iv. Although Section 153 A does not say that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence ... assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search or requisition of documents or undisclosed income or property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment

Megapix Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1151/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1151/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Megapix Vanijya Pvt. Ltd……………………………………………..…..……Appellant C/O Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata – 700069. [Pan: Aahcm6624J] Vs. Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata............…....….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 27, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.05.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 26.09.2012 By Declaring A Total Loss Of Rs.4,540/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Due To Large Share Premium Received By The Assessee During The Relevant Financial Year. Consequently, The Assessing Officer Issued Notices U/S 142(1) & 142(2) Of The Act Requesting For Furnishing Requisite Information. In Response To The Notices, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Appeared Before The Assessing Officer & Provided Primary Details Including An Explanation That The Assessee Company Was Engaged In The Business Of Share Trading. Upon

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

shareholders. Non-appearance of the directors of the company could not be the sole ground to justify for treating the share application money as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. Reliance in this respect has been placed on the following decisions: 1. Decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Calcutta

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Natarajan Sathishkumar, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 198/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

jewels.In Para 24.2 of the order, Hon’ble IBS has accepted the plea that the Gross Profit on unaccounted sales as added to the undisclosed income shall be given the benefit of telescoping as prayed for by the appellants. The Ld. AO was directed to grant telescoping benefits for investments

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Natarajan Saravanakumar, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 197/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

jewels.In Para 24.2 of the order, Hon’ble IBS has accepted the plea that the Gross Profit on unaccounted sales as added to the undisclosed income shall be given the benefit of telescoping as prayed for by the appellants. The Ld. AO was directed to grant telescoping benefits for investments

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Madurai vs. Gurusamy Dhanasekaran, Palani

Appeals stand dismissed

ITA 196/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.196/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Gurusamy Dhanasekaran बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Abtpd-3576-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.197/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Saravanakumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Azcps-8604-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.198/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit Shri Natarajan Satishkumar बनाम/ Central Circle-1 No.6/1, Sithanathan Street, Vs. Madurai. Palani, Dindigul Dist.-624 601. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Auhps-8894-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Dr ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-11-2024

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld. AR
Section 144Section 153C

jewels.In Para 24.2 of the order, Hon’ble IBS has accepted the plea that the Gross Profit on unaccounted sales as added to the undisclosed income shall be given the benefit of telescoping as prayed for by the appellants. The Ld. AO was directed to grant telescoping benefits for investments

ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Incredible India Projects Private Limited, Secunderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 604/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.604 & 605/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19) Acit Vs. Incredible India Projects Central Circle-2(4) Private Limited Hyderabad Secunderabad [Pan : Aabci9355A] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Sandeep Goel, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri B.Bala Krishna, Cit, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of 19/09/2024 Hearing: घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 14/11/2024 आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Separate, But Identical Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Learned Cit(A)]-12, Hyderabad, Both Dated 30/08/2022, Pertaining To A.Y.2017-18 & 2018-19. Since The Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Goel, ARFor Respondent: : Shri B.Bala Krishna, CIT, DR
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(9)(d)Section 271ASection 274

also filed submissions for the A.Y.2018-19 and submitted that the additional income offered 4 towards cash payment does not fall in the ambit of undisclosed income as per Explanation 3 of section 271AAB of the Act. The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant submissions, levied penalty u/s 270A ... reporting of income which in consequence of mis-reporting thereof. Similarly, the Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act @30% of the undisclosed income as per provisions of 271AAB (1A) of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the penalty orders, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) and challenged

Marimuthu Saravana, Namakkal vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1, Coimbatore

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 996/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.992/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.993/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.994/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.995/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.996/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri Marimuthu Saravana Dcit 269, Navakadu, Mampalayam Road, Central Circle-1 बनाम/ Vs. Agraharam Post, Pallipalayam, Coimbatore. Namakkal-638 008. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aumps-8546-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)-Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-09-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14-11-2024

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 153A

sustainable both on facts and in law. 4. The CIT (Appeals) - 20, Chennai erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.3,74,68,278/- as undisclosed income from the business of money lending based on the disputed seized materials / lack of seized materials in the computation of taxable total income without