← 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

Vummenthala Sagar Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-2, Karimnagar

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

ITA 681/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.681/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2017-18) Shri Vummenthala Sagar Reddy, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad. Ward-2, Pan: Asopv9337K Karimnagar. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri C. Maheshwar Reddy, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 08/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 10/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Inturi Rama Rao : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 19.02.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual. The Return Of Income For The Asst. Year 2017-18 Was Filed On 22.02.2018 & Revised The Same On 08.08.2018 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.3,88,150/-. The Assessee Had Deposited Cash To The Tune Of Rs.26,53,153/- In His Bank Account During F.Y. 2016-17. Ita No.681/Hyd/2025 2

For Appellant: Shri C. Maheshwar Reddy, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

completed by the Assessing Officer determining the total income assessed at Rs.44,65,180/- after making addition on account of cash deposits treating as undisclosed income. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed after considering the submissions made before

Santosh Kumar Sinha, Purnia vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

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

ITA 269/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraita Nos.268 & 269/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Santosh Kumar Sinha…….………………. ……………..…..........……….Appellant S/O Late Satya Narayan Lal, Carriers Colony, Sakti Nagar, Purnia, Bihar – 854301. [Pan: Awhps7019N] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna…………..……. ……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri K. P. Jalan, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 09, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 31.03.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.268/Pat/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

determining total income at Rs.17,48,240/- by adding an amount of Rs.1,73,550/- as undisclosed income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal has been dismissed by passing an ex parte order

Santosh Kumar Sinha, Purnia vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna

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

ITA 268/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraita Nos.268 & 269/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Santosh Kumar Sinha…….………………. ……………..…..........……….Appellant S/O Late Satya Narayan Lal, Carriers Colony, Sakti Nagar, Purnia, Bihar – 854301. [Pan: Awhps7019N] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-2, Patna…………..……. ……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri K. P. Jalan, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Rajat Datta, Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 22, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 09, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Against Separate Orders Both Dated 31.03.2025 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. Ita No.268/Pat/2025 Is Taken As Lead Case For Narration Of Facts.

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250

determining total income at Rs.17,48,240/- by adding an amount of Rs.1,73,550/- as undisclosed income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal has been dismissed by passing an ex parte order