← 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

Surendra Garg HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO- 19(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 583/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

provision for block assessment was under section 158BA of the Act, 1961. The erstwhile scheme of block assessment under section 158BA envisaged assessment of 'undisclosed income' for two reasons, firstly that there were two parallel assessments envisaged under the erstwhile regime, i.e., (i) block assessment under section 158BA to assess ... undisclosed income' and (ii) regular assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Act to make assessment qua income other than undisclosed income. Secondly, that the 'undisclosed income' was chargeable to tax at a special rate of 60% under section 113 whereas income other than 'undisclosed income' was required

Surendra Garg HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO - 19(3)(4), Mumbai

ITA 300/MUM/2024[2012-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2012-23
For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 68

provision for block assessment was under section 158BA of the Act, 1961. The erstwhile scheme of block assessment under section 158BA envisaged assessment of ‘undisclosed income' for two reasons, firstly that there were two parallel assessments envisaged under the erstwhile regime, i.e., (i) block assessment under section 158BA to assess ... undisclosed income’ and (ii) regular assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Act to make assessment qua income other than undisclosed income. Secondly, that the ‘undisclosed income' was chargeable to tax at a special rate of 60% under section 113 whereas income other than ‘undisclosed income’ was required

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-30, New Delhi vs. Sh. Radhey Shyam Bansal, New Delhi

Accordingly. Hence, the AO is directed to restrict the additions only to the income on account of commission @0.50% as mentioned in the table above. These grounds may be treated as partly allowed

ITA 5721/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

commission on all these transactions of accommodation entries against the gross value of transactions as done by the AO by holding the same as undisclosed income of the assessee. The relevant observations of ld. CIT(A) in para 11 to 61 of the order at pages

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-30, New Delhi vs. Sh. Radhey Shyam Bansal, New Delhi

Accordingly. Hence, the AO is directed to restrict the additions only to the income on account of commission @0.50% as mentioned in the table above. These grounds may be treated as partly allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

commission on all these transactions of accommodation entries against the gross value of transactions as done by the AO by holding the same as undisclosed income of the assessee. The relevant observations of ld. CIT(A) in para 11 to 61 of the order at pages

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-30, New Delhi vs. Sh. Radhey Shyam Bansal, New Delhi

Accordingly. Hence, the AO is directed to restrict the additions only to the income on account of commission @0.50% as mentioned in the table above. These grounds may be treated as partly allowed

ITA 5719/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 1Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

commission on all these transactions of accommodation entries against the gross value of transactions as done by the AO by holding the same as undisclosed income of the assessee. The relevant observations of ld. CIT(A) in para 11 to 61 of the order at pages

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle)-1(4), Ahmedabad vs. Hindva Builders, Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1563/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

given telescoping of the income declared by the assessee under IDS (Income Disclosure Scheme)-2016. He observed that the assessee had declared total undisclosed income amounting to Rs. 3 crores for the year under consideration under the head “Other”. He, therefore, held that the aforesaid income of the assessee ... Jurisdictional ITAT, Ahmedabad that Entire 'on money' receipts in relation to booking or sale of flats could not be treated as undisclosed income, but under section 158BC, a reasonable amount of profit which assesse could have earned by charging 'on money' in relation to flats booked and sold

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad vs. Hindva Builders, Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1562/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

given telescoping of the income declared by the assessee under IDS (Income Disclosure Scheme)-2016. He observed that the assessee had declared total undisclosed income amounting to Rs. 3 crores for the year under consideration under the head “Other”. He, therefore, held that the aforesaid income of the assessee ... Jurisdictional ITAT, Ahmedabad that Entire 'on money' receipts in relation to booking or sale of flats could not be treated as undisclosed income, but under section 158BC, a reasonable amount of profit which assesse could have earned by charging 'on money' in relation to flats booked and sold

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad vs. Hindva Builders, Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1451/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

given telescoping of the income declared by the assessee under IDS (Income Disclosure Scheme)-2016. He observed that the assessee had declared total undisclosed income amounting to Rs. 3 crores for the year under consideration under the head “Other”. He, therefore, held that the aforesaid income of the assessee ... Jurisdictional ITAT, Ahmedabad that Entire 'on money' receipts in relation to booking or sale of flats could not be treated as undisclosed income, but under section 158BC, a reasonable amount of profit which assesse could have earned by charging 'on money' in relation to flats booked and sold

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad vs. Hindva Builders, Ahmedabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed

ITA 1450/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Sl.Nos.1 & 2 - Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250Section 3(1)

given telescoping of the income declared by the assessee under IDS (Income Disclosure Scheme)-2016. He observed that the assessee had declared total undisclosed income amounting to Rs. 3 crores for the year under consideration under the head “Other”. He, therefore, held that the aforesaid income of the assessee ... Jurisdictional ITAT, Ahmedabad that Entire 'on money' receipts in relation to booking or sale of flats could not be treated as undisclosed income, but under section 158BC, a reasonable amount of profit which assesse could have earned by charging 'on money' in relation to flats booked and sold

Vipul Arjanbhai Parmar, Mangrol vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Junagadh

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 217/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपील सं. /Ita No.217/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 बनाम/ Vipul Arjanbhai Parmar Income Tax Officer Vs C/O. Sarda & Sarda (Ca), Sakar, Ward – 1, Junagadh 1St Floor, Dr. Radha-Krishnan Road, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot, Gujarat - 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Ditpp9286B (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""थ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

since time to ancestral, they have only agriculture income. There were no any proof of taxable income, any income from other source or any undisclosed income regarding Rs.5,00,000/-, Department has accepted Rs. 10,00,000/- as agriculture income, means partly accepted so why no fully accepted in absence

Ajaykumar Natwarlal Sheth, Rajkot vs. The DCIT, Circle 1(2) Rajkot, Rajkot

ITA 108/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Dec 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

genuine losses and profits for its clients. The losses were utilized to reduce tax liability and the profits were utilized to cover up undisclosed income or to set off these profits against huge losses. On spot verification carried out by the DIT(I&CI), the brokers admitted to have misused

Damodar Prasad Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1204/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. Brij Lal Meena, Addl. CIT
Section 115BSection 250Section 69A

cash book, the burden to prove shift on the department to establish that the cash as per cash book is from the undisclosed income of the assessee. Nothing of this sort was brought on record and therefore this decision is not applicable on the facts of the assessee's case

Shamkant Keshav Kotkar (Prop. Nandan Builders), Pune vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1358/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 26Section 263Section 40

linked with the search and requisition under sections 132 and 132A ofthe Act. The object of Section 153A is to bring under tax the undisclosed income which is foundduring the course of search or 19 pursuant to search or requisition. Therefore, only in a case wherethe ITA No.1358/PUN/2025 [A] undisclosed

DCIT, Kolkata vs. Sujit Arya, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 751/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Sujit Arya Dcit P-3, Paramathesh Barun Sarani, 3, Govt Place West, Kolkata- New Cit Road, Central Metro, Vs. 700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700073, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Actpa8796J Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 133A

against the deletion of addition of ₹4,41,61,742/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO in respect of undisclosed income admitted by the assessee during survey u/s 133A of the Act. 3.1. The facts in brief are that the assessee was carrying ... explanation of the assessee qua the seized documents was rejected as regards the admission of the assessee qua the undisclosed income in the statement recorded at the time of survey. Accordingly, the addition of ₹4,41,61,742/- was made towards undisclosed profit as admitted in the statement recorded during

Ashok Prasad Gupta, North Dinajpur vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(4), Raiganj

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1848/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1848/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Ashok Prasad Gupta,………………………….…Appellant C/O. Daspara C.S. Shop, Daspara B.O., Chopra, North Dinajpur-733207, W.B. [Pan:Bfepg3955G] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………..Respondent Ward-2(4), Raiganj, Income Tax Office, Karnajora, Rajganj-733130, West Bengal Appearances By: Shri Sujit Basu, Advocate & Shri Rajib Mukherjee, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, Jcit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: December 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: December 31, 2025 O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 270A(1)

Rs.2,02,93,665/- in his bank account and income assessed at Rs.16,23,490/- and initiated penalty proceedings under section 270A(1) for undisclosed income of Rs.12,25,980/-. 5. On being aggrieved, the assesese preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) partly

New Track Exim Private Limited, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 18(3), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2765/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 68

bald assertion by the ASSESSING OFFICER that the credits were a circular route adopted by the Assessee to plough back its own undisclosed income into its accounts, can be of no avail. The revenue was required to prove this allegation. An allegation by itself which is based on assumption will

Nitin Johari, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-3, New Delhi

In the result, the issues on the merits as raised vide ground nos

ITA 1530/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh. Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2013-14 Nitin Johari, Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3, 2Nd A-15, Floor, Sadhna New Delhi Enclave, South Delhi, New Delhi – 110 017 Pan No. Aajpj4136D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

statements of various persons and proceeded to hold that the Long Term Capital Gains earned by the assessee is a sham transaction and represents undisclosed income of the assessee by making the addition of Rs. 1,29,19,571/- and simultaneously, AO has also proceeded to make an addition

Shri Shah Afroze Hossain, Bhagalpur vs. Dy. CIT, Cent, Cir-2, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 711/PAT/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.711/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Shri Shah Afroze Hossain.….…………………....…………………....Appellant 12, Shahganjhi, Habibpur, Bhagalpur, Bihar-812006. [Pan: Aapph1112D] Vs. Dcit, Central Circle-2, Patna..………....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Rastogi, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 14, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 30, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Patna-3 (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 22.10.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2022–23 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹75,56,770, Comprising The Income From Business Of ₹6,54,569, Long- Term Capital Gains: ₹49,60,293 & Income From Other Sources Of ₹19,35,912. A Search & Seizure Operation Under Section 132 Of The Act Was Carried Out On 29.12.2022 At The Residential & Business Premises Of The Assessee Pursuant To A Warrant Of Authorisation Issued By The Director Of Investigation, Patna. During The Course Of The Search

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 50CSection 50C(2)

opinion, adoption of a net profit rate of 16% on undisclosed turnover of ₹2,06,44,675 would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, undisclosed income works out to approximately ₹33,03,148, and the assessee is entitled to consequential relief. Accordingly, we direct that a net profit rate

Gita Sharma, Durgapur vs. I.T.O., Ward - 2(4), Durgapur

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

ITA 2267/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Dec 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

during the relevant period and thus, it was nothing but excess/inflated purchases shown and accordingly, a sum of ₹36,46,727/- was added as undisclosed income u/s 69A of the Act to the total income of the assessee and also an amount of ₹1,25,43,804/- was treated

Integrated Service Point Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, CC-2(4), Chennai

ITA 1883/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon'Ble Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 Integrated Service Point Ltd., (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Pvt. Ltd.,) The Dy./Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. 6C, 6Th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai - 600 002. Pan: Aaaci 9527P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23 The Dy./Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Chennai. Integrated Service Point Ltd., (Formerly Integrated Service Point Pvt. Ltd.,) Vs. 6C, 6Th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai - 600 002. Pan: Aaaci 9527P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr. Y. Sridhar, Fca प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr. Bipin C.N, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषण की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025 : 30.12.2025 :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 134(4)Section 250

assessed income A.Y. Additions made in the assessment Α.Υ. 2019-20 Disallowance u/S 37(1) Inflated transport & freight charges and undisclosed income of port handling charges- *this amount was admitted in revised statement of total income 3,02,02,100 3,02,02,100 *See note below Disallowance