← 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

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 94/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.94/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 07.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao By Making An Addition Of Rs.73,11,760/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred “The Act” Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

giving tax. Thus according to the AO, the LTCG on sale of shares of M/s AGGSL shown by assessee is not genuine and represent undisclosed income of the assessee and made an addition of Rs.73,24,001/- under section 68 of the Act. 5. On appeal

Sheetal Rupesh Salva, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward-20(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 93/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.93/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sheetal Rupesh Savla बिधम/ Ito Ward-20(3)(3) 601 Dev In Apartments, 6Th Floor, Piramal Vs. Adenwala Road, Plot-511, Chamber, Parel, Mumbai- Matunga, Mumbai-400019. 400012. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Adhpk2176R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv) Shri Dinesh Shah Revenue By: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/03/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 05.12.2022 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Upholding The Action Of The Ao Making An Addition Of Rs.3,17,12,750/- U/S 68 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Which According To The Assessee Ought To Have Been Held To Be Exempt U/S 10(38) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharen V. Gandhi (Adv)For Respondent: Shri Nayanjoti Nath (Sr. AR)
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 68

giving tax. Thus according to the AO, the LTCG on sale of shares of M/s AGGSL shown by assessee is not genuine and represent undisclosed income of the assessee and made an addition of Rs.1,02,20,000. And made a total addition under section

DCIT Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Dynamic Infraplanners Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1645/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1644/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1645/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Dynamic Infraplanners Pvt. Ltd., 30/27, 1St Floor, East Patel Nagar, Central Circle-1, Noida-201301 New Delhi-110008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccd2264Q Assessee By : Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. G. Joseph Gangte, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03.2024 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-4, Kanpur Dated 23.03.2023. 2. Since, The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Are Similar, They Were Heard Together & Being Adjudicated By A Common Order. In 1644/Del/2023, Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Revenue:

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. G. Joseph Gangte, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 68

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

DCIT Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Dynamic Infraplanners Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1644/DEL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharatdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1644/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ita No. 1645/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. Dynamic Infraplanners Pvt. Ltd., 30/27, 1St Floor, East Patel Nagar, Central Circle-1, Noida-201301 New Delhi-110008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccd2264Q Assessee By : Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. N. G. Joseph Gangte, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.03.2024 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar: The Present Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)-4, Kanpur Dated 23.03.2023. 2. Since, The Issue Involved In Both The Appeals Are Similar, They Were Heard Together & Being Adjudicated By A Common Order. In 1644/Del/2023, Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Revenue:

For Appellant: Dr. Shashwat Bajpai, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. G. Joseph Gangte, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 68

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