← 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

Dipen Hasmukhbhai Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(3)(1) (New) Previously Ward-1(3)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 907/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Respondent by : Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr. D.RFor Respondent: Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

learned NFAC-CIT(A) has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs.11,00,021/- made @ 18.71 of Rs.58,79,325/- as undisclosed income of the appellant, ignoring the fact that the said receipts are not in the nature of taxable income of the appellant. 4. The appellant craves liberty

DCIT (Central), Bhopal vs. Shailendra Sharma, Bhopal

In the result the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment

ITA 305/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 142(1)Section 153A

during the search and other material which would include income declared in the returns, if any, furnished by the assessee as well as the undisclosed income. However, in case during the search no incriminating material is found, in case of completed/unabated assessment, the only remedy available to the Revenue would ... with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A of the Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is found during the course of search or pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case where the undisclosed income

Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 161/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

found credited in the year in respect of which the assessee fails to explain the nature and source shall be assessed as its undisclosed income. In the facts of the present case, both the nature & source of the share application received was fully explained by the assessee. The assessee ... found credited in the year in respect of which the assessee fails to explain the nature and source, it shall be assessed as its undisclosed income. In the facts of the present case, both the nature & source of the share application received was fully explained by the assessee. The assessee

Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 160/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 160 & 161/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Balaka Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(1), 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Vs Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 [Pan : Aadcb2610B] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R & Saurav Gupta, A/R Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Instant Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”). Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 29/11/2023, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter ‘The Act’) Arising Out Of The Penalty Order Passed By The Ld. Assessing Officer U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act & Ita No. 161/Kol/2023, Is Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dt. 28/11/2023, Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Assessing Officer Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 Of The Act, For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Various Grounds In Both These Appeals, But The Effective Issue Raised In Ita No. 161/Kol/2024 Is Against The Addition Made U/S 68 Of The Act For Unexplained Share Capital Confirmed By The Ld. Cit(A) & In Ita No. 160/Kol/2024 Is Against The Levy Of Penalty U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act On The Addition Made

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, A/R and Saurav Gupta, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, Sr. D/R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

found credited in the year in respect of which the assessee fails to explain the nature and source shall be assessed as its undisclosed income. In the facts of the present case, both the nature & source of the share application received was fully explained by the assessee. The assessee ... found credited in the year in respect of which the assessee fails to explain the nature and source, it shall be assessed as its undisclosed income. In the facts of the present case, both the nature & source of the share application received was fully explained by the assessee. The assessee

ACIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mediacom Communications Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 68/MUM/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Acit 2(2)(1) Vs. Mediacom Room No. 545, 5 Th Floor Communications Private Aayakar Bhavan, Limited, 349 Business M.K. Road, Point, Western Express Maharashtra - 400020 Highway Andheri Eeast Maharashtra – 400059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aafcm6252N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Smiti Samant
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 41(1)

appellant has discharged primary onus of substantiating the balances claimed towards sundry creditors claimed as payable. 6.9 In respect of additions made towards undisclosed income on account of mismatch in income declared in ITR and as reported in 26AS, it is noticed that the income declared from the respective party ... Edelweiss is at Rs.19,91,723/- as against income reported in 26AS of Rs.11,05,822/- As such additions made towards undisclosed income of Rs.40,133/- is not justified. 6.10 In view of the above, I am of the considerate view that the amounts claimed as payable to various creditors

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, New Delhi, Delhi vs. India Finsec Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3591/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Sh. Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Sh. Kapil Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Dhami, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 158Section 158BSection 68

assessments, makes such notice the very foundation for jurisdiction. Such notice is required to be served on the person who is found to have undisclosed income. Section 158BC provides for enquiry and assessment. After the return is filed, clause (b) of section 158BC provides that the Assessing Officer shall proceed ... determine the undisclosed income of the block period in the manner laid down in section 1588BB and "the provisions of section 142, sub- 4 KNS Infracon Pvt. Ltd. sections (2) and (3) of section 143, section 144 and section 145 shall, so far as may be, apply". 7. Hence

Ganesh Babu Muppavarapu Nirmala Laxmi, Vijayawada vs. CIT(Appeals), Delhi

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

ITA 151/VIZ/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 Jun 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.151/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2014-15) Ganesh Babu Muppavarapu Vs. Income Tax Officer Nirmala Laxmi Ward-2(4) 9-120/1, K.S.Rao Street Vijayawada Ashok Nagar Kanuru, Vijayawada [Pan : Amlpm7675A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.L.Narasimha Rao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 133ASection 144Section 147

dated 30.12.2019, assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.22,52,310/- by making addition of Rs.9,70,000/- as undisclosed income. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) upheld the addition made ... Rs.9,70,000/- between the additional income of Rs.16,00,000/- and income of Rs.6,30,000/- admitted under the head ‘other sources’ as undisclosed income. The Ld.AR submitted that the same was upheld by the Ld.CIT(A) against the principles of natural justice. He, therefore, pleaded to afford

Ganesh Corporation, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Ax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2) (Previously Ward-3(3)(8)), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 674/AHD/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

addition of Rs.34,78,968/- observing that the accommodation entries taken by the assessee in terms of bogus bills has to be considered as undisclosed income of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Mahesh Somabhai Patel, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1854/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

brought on record any other material collected through independent inquiries to show that the amount in question should be treated as undisclosed income of 5 I.T.A No. 1854/Ahd/2019 A.Y. 2014‐15 Page No ITO Vs. Shri Mahesh Somabhai Patel the Appellant when the Appellant furnished all the documents which were

ACIT Central Circle, Meerut vs. Dr. Leena Chaudhary, Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1350/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19 Acit Vs. Dr. Leena Chaudhary Central Circle A-43/A, Defence Colony, Meerut Meerut -250001 Pan No.Acrpp0653M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. P.S. Kashyap, Ca Date Of Hearing: 16/05/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/06/2024 Order

Section 132Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 69BSection 69C

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 153 A 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

Mudit Kumar Bajaj, Ujjain vs. ITO-1(2), Ujjain

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed”

ITA 550/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Indore18 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani(Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aezpb2621P Assessee By Ms. Nupur Ladha & Shri Vaibhav Siroliya, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 13.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 40A(3)

submitted before the lower authorities and have not been disputed by them. It is not the case of the Revenue either that unaccounted or undisclosed income of the assessee has been utilised in making the cash payments. 43. In the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and respectfully

Sunil Kumar Sivadasan, Kodaikanal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dindigul

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 290/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.290/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Sunil Kumar Sivadasan Ito Ward-1, बनाम/ No.1, Prop. Vishuthi Constructions Dindigul. Sidda Vaidya Salai, Anna Salai, Vs. Kodaikanal-624 101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aozpk-8325-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri P.M. Kathir (Advocate) -Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri R. Mukundan (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13-06-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir (Advocate) -Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Mukundan (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 147Section 69A

assessment order, Ld. AO noted that the assessee filed declaration in Form No.1 under Income Declaration Scheme-2016 (IDS) on 29-09-2019 declaring undisclosed income of Rs.4.52 Lacs. However, the assessee failed to adhere to due dates for payment of taxes payable under the scheme. Accordingly, the declaration

Yash Synthetics Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT-13(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year :2013-14 Yash Synthetics Private Limited Office No.2, 2Nd Floor, Shah Trade Center, Rani Sati Marg, Malad (East), Mumbai – 400 097. Pan:Aaacy-0426-B ---- Appellant Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax 13(3)(2), Room No.229, 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 --- Respondent

For Appellant: S/Shri Vimal Punmiya &For Respondent: Shri Dinesh A. Chourasia
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

have made payment of Rs.1.61 crores by way of cash as noted in the document. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer assessed the aforesaid amount as undisclosed income of the assessee u/s. 69A of the Act in assessment year 2013- 14. The Ld.CIT(A) also confirmed the same and hence, the assessee

Vinod Kumar Rana, Vijay Nagar Ghaziabad vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1176/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 250(6)

grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the addition of Rs.11,10,000/- made to the returned income alleging unexplained and undisclosed income earned by the assessee. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out at the outset that upon inquiry under

Veenita Enterprise Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1199/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

income declaring miniscule amounts as compared to the investment made in the assessee company. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- was added as undisclosed income in hands of the assessee company. 17. Share capital introduced in the name of Parshvanath Sales Ltd.: During the course of assessment proceedings ... transactions or his creditworthiness by proving his monetary ability to make such gifts of substantial amount, gift amount was to be treated as undisclosed income. The facts of this case were that assessee claimed to have received gift from his NRI brother. The Assessing Officer treated it as assessee

DCIT, CC-3(3), Kolkata vs. Amicus Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 803/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

making the assessment under Section 153Aonly 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 ... apart from that no other incriminating material was found during the course of search which can at least indicate that it is the undisclosed income of the assessee which has been routed in the books through exchanging of cheque against the cash or any other mode. 7. Under these given

Sh. Abhishek Bansal, Barnala vs. Pr. CIT, Patiala

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 131/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 131/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Abhishek Bansal, Vs. Pr. Commissioner बनाम Prop. M/S Lifeline Multi Income Tax, Specialilty Hospitality, 25 Acre Patiala Extn., Near Fountain Chowk, Barnala, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Acgpb5740E अपीलाथ" ./ Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.05.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.06.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 115Section 115BSection 133Section 263

Sections, if, the assessee fails to give the 131-Chd-2023 – Shri Abhishek Bansal, Barnala 12 explanation about the ‘nature and source’ of such undisclosed income. The ld. PCIT in our view, in this case has confused himself between the ‘undisclosed income’ and the word ‘unexplained income’. As per provisions ... Section 68 to 69D are attracted in respect of the undisclosed income but the condition for assessing such income under the said provisions is that the assessee has either failed to disclose the nature and source of such income or the AO does not get satisfied with the explanation offered

Dharmappa Anvitha, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Mysore

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

ITA 853/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing
Section 143(3)Section 147

country's economy, for, with demonetization announced, there was hectic transfer of old-currency notes through various channels to regularize the unexplained and undisclosed income in certain cases. For this reason, the Department had launched various measures such as enforcement drives and Operation Clean Money (OCM) on 31.01.2017 to analyze

Santosh Khunteta, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-29(5), Delhi

In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3139/DEL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 56

Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, in respect of the arbitrary and unlawful addition of Rs. 8,15,000/-, made by the Assessing Officer as undisclosed income u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act, on account of assuming the sale proceeds of equity shares as unexplained, contrary to the documentary evidences ... facts in upholding the unlawful and factually misconceived addition of Rs. 22,38,000/- being made by the Assessing Officer, as undisclosed income u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act, in the reassessment order u/s 147 being passed by the learned assessing officer for the AY 2010-11, on account

Rajesh Kumar Jalan, Hooghly vs. ITO, Ward-44(2), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 255/KOL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 263Section 44A

addition of Rs.2,43,78,864/-. After giving credit of the income disclosed by the assessee in his return of income, he determined the undisclosed income of the assessee. The Id. Assessing Officer further estimated unexplained investment of Rs.41,21,145/-. In other words, it was added