← 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

Harshi Tripathi, Surguja vs. ITO 1, Ambikapur

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

ITA 524/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.524/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Harshi Tripathi Nawapare Main Road, Surajpur, Surguja-497 229 Pan: Aonpt1286N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

source of cash deposit in the bank account of the appellant remains unexplained. Accordingly, the addition of Rs.11,82,00/- on account of undisclosed income, is hereby upheld.” Therefore, it is discernable from the fore-going paras that the assessee had not provided any evidence substantiating the cash withdrawal

Annuva Infrastructure Private Limited, Nagpur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 4(4) Nagpur, Nagpur

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 84/NAG/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryannuva Infrastructure Pvt. Ito, Ward-4(4), Nagpur. Ltd., Plot No.1249, Near Sindhu Bhawan, Vs. Vaishali Nagar, Nagpur-440017. Pan: Aahca 0371 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Moriyani, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R
Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

then the Department is free to proceed to reopen their individual assessments in accordance with law, but it cannot be regarded as undisclosed income of the appellant company”. 8. Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the addition

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Damodar Prasad Parwal, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 959/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA (Thru:VC)For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153C

recorded in the said data and it was established that the appellant was associated with the above group and had paid cash loans from undisclosed Income and received interest income on these loans. 4.2.2 The information in respect of the appellant was forwarded by DCIT, Central Cirde-3, Jaipur ... matter is that under Section 153A and 153C, ‘the total income’ is to be seized. The total income includes returned income (if any), undisclosed income unearthed during the search or requisitioning and information possessed from the other sources. For Illustration:- An assesee had returned income of Rs. 100, undisclosed income

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Gordhan Das Maheshwari, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated hereinabove

ITA 958/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Bhatra, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153C

recorded in the said data and it was established that the appellant was associated with the above group and had paid cash loans from undisclosed Income and received interest income on these loans. 4.2.2 The information in respect of the appellant was forwarded by DCIT, Central Cirde-3, Jaipur ... matter is that under Section 153A and 153C, ‘the total income’ is to be seized. The total income includes returned income (if any), undisclosed income unearthed during the search or requisitioning and information possessed from the other sources. For Illustration:- An assesee had returned income of Rs. 100, undisclosed income

Pranati Buildcon, Kota vs. ACIT/DCIT Cen Cir, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Hanedra Gargieya, Adv. (V.C.)For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr.-DR a
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 69C

accepted in his statement recorded during survey proceedings, that these expenses were not recorded in regular books of accounts of the assessee and offered undisclosed income of Rs. 8,90,000/- for taxation. The assessee had included this offered income of Rs. 8,90,000/- in its total income under ... Shri Pradeep Dadhich accepted that these expenses were not recorded in regular books of 6 Pranati Buildcon, Kota. accounts of the assessee and offered undisclosed income of Rs. 8,90,000/-for taxation. The assessee has incurred an expenditure as per the findings of survey. This fact is not disputed

Rajnibhai Bhogilal Desai, Kheda vs. The ITO, Ward-5, Nadiad

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

ITA 533/AHD/2025[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Sept 2025AY 2002-03

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

case of the appellant, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 59,32,051/- on account of undisclosed income when no such income has been earned by the appellant. 5.1. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition ... case of the appellant, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 52,16,180/- on account of undisclosed income when no such income has been earned by the appellant. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual whose case

Avon Containners Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 5161/DEL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

transactions. Thus Rs.55,00,000/- was its own unaccounted income routed back using above modus operandi. Hence, the shame transactions made is treated as “undisclosed Income” and Rs.55,00,000/- is accordingly added back to its Total Income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the relevant

Partap Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-55(1), New Delhi

In the result appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 7359/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

from the information received from DRI, the goods allegedly exported by the assessee had never reached Russia. Thus, the remittances received from Russia were undisclosed income of the assessee. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.2,27,02,883/- was added back u/s 68 of the LT. act, 1961 as unexplained credit

Partap Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-55(1), New Delhi

In the result appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 7358/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

from the information received from DRI, the goods allegedly exported by the assessee had never reached Russia. Thus, the remittances received from Russia were undisclosed income of the assessee. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.2,27,02,883/- was added back u/s 68 of the LT. act, 1961 as unexplained credit

Partap Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-55(1), New Delhi

In the result appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 7357/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 68

from the information received from DRI, the goods allegedly exported by the assessee had never reached Russia. Thus, the remittances received from Russia were undisclosed income of the assessee. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.2,27,02,883/- was added back u/s 68 of the LT. act, 1961 as unexplained credit

Sarita Agrawal, Rairangpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 213/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.213/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Sarita Agrawal Vs Ito, Ward-1, Baripada Ward No:06, Rairangpur, Baripada, Mayurbhanj, 757043 Pan No. : Abvpa 9972 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22/09/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

assessee and being part of the turnover of the assessee, we are of the view that the same cannot be treated as undisclosed income of the assessee. Consequently, the addition as made by the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee

Ghanshyam Bhabagrahi Padhi, Odisha vs. ITO, Ward Dhenkanal, Odisha

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 466/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri B.R.Pattnaik, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

from Eastern Valley Agro Pvt. Ltd., a company in which the assessee himself is one of the directors, who is doing agricultural operations, as undisclosed income of the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has no 2 other source of income other than agriculture. The assessee had disclosed

Shri Vishwakarama Jewellers, Akola vs. DCIT Akola Circle, Akola

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 99/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 69B

which is not separate from the entire lot of stock of the assessee as stock pertaining to the business of assessee and treat as undisclosed income? 2 Shri Vishwakarma Jewellers ITA no.99/Nag./2025 2] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case ... no.99/Nag./2025 15. Therefore, the foundational requirement before invoking the deeming provisions is not that there were certain survey operations u/s 133A and some undisclosed income has been detected and surrendered by the Assessee and thus, the deeming provisions are automatically attracted. Rather the foundational requirement is whether the Assessee

Kashi Nath Seth Sarraf Private Limited, Hardoi vs. ACIT, Sitapur

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

ITA 88/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 234BSection 44Section 68

appellant company had already accounted for income represented by cash deposited in the bank and therefore, the same cannot fee considered to be undisclosed income as per provisions of Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 resulting into double addition/taxation as the amount of cash deposits ... facts of the case and the income which had already been included in the return of income which cannot be deemed to be undisclosed income u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 attracting the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Besides this these provisions

Income Tax Officer, Mohali Punjab vs. Taj Land Developefrs and Promoters Private Limited, Sector Mohali Punjab

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 606/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 1Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151

impugned notice and when the respondent authority was himself unsure as to the year of taxability of the income which is stated to be undisclosed income." Harjeet Singh Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi), order dated 12.11.2018, in ITA No. 2013/DEU2015 "In my considered opinion, the basis of reopening itself is based

ACIT, CC - 3(4), Kolkata vs. Rameswara Infrastructures Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and 11

ITA 2692/KOL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2019-20 Acit, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata.….……………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. Rameswara Infrastructures Ltd ………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 19A, Sarat Bose Road Lr Sarani Kolkata-20. [Pan: Aaecr0505J] C.O. 19/Kol/2025 (In Ita Nos.2692 /Kol/2024) Assessment Year: 2019-20 Rameswara Infrastructures Ltd.….……………. ….……….……….……Cross-Objector 19A, Sarat Bose Road Lr Sarani Kolkata-20. [Pan: Aaecr0505J] Vs. Acit, Central Circle-3(4), Kolkata...………………………...…..…………….Respondent Appearances By: Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Raja Sengupta, Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : September 22, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey:

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 68

statement recorded by Surendra Kumar Khetawat u/s 132(4) on 02.12.2020, an amount of Rs.22 crores was disclosed by Surendra Kumar Khetawat as undisclosed income of Khetawat Group. In the disclosure petition dated 27.01.2021 submitted before the DDIT, Investigation, the breakup of the said disclosure was provided in the manner

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal, Mumbai

ITA 4181/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar Sahson Allahabad (Civil Appeal Nos.7738-7739/2021, 7732-7735/2021 and 7740/2021) has held that for unabated year once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing the incriminating material during the search, the AO would assume jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income even in case ... assessments made under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3) of the Act, 1961 and to reassess the total income taking notice of undisclosed income even found during the search and seizure operation. 15.1 In view of the discussion hereinabove, once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal, Mumbai

ITA 4136/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

Kesarwani Zarda Bhandar Sahson Allahabad (Civil Appeal Nos.7738-7739/2021, 7732-7735/2021 and 7740/2021) has held that for unabated year once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing the incriminating material during the search, the AO would assume jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income even in case ... assessments made under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3) of the Act, 1961 and to reassess the total income taking notice of undisclosed income even found during the search and seizure operation. 15.1 In view of the discussion hereinabove, once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(3), Mumbai vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal, Mumbai

ITA 3852/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

Zarda Bhandar Sahson Allahabad (Civil Appeal Nos. 7738-7739/2021, 7732-7735/2021 and 7740/2021) has held that for unabated year once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing the incriminating material during the search, the AO would assume jurisdiction to assess or reassess the total income even ... assessments made under section 143(1)(a) or 143(3) of the Act, 1961 and to reassess the total income taking notice of undisclosed income even found during the search and seizure operation. 15.1 In view of the discussion hereinabove, once during search undisclosed income is found on unearthing

Shree Roshan Cold Storage, Sambhal vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, accordingly, the order passed u/s 263 of the Act is set aside

ITA 3156/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahmanshree Roshan Cold Storage, Vs. Pr.Cit, Vpo – Rustampur Vill. Niyawali, Bareilly (U.P.) Sambhal – 244 302 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan :Aagfs7012N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V. Rajakumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Citdr Date Of Hearing : 22.09.2025 Date Of Order : 22.09.2025 Order Per S. Rifaur Rahman:

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CITDR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 263

Rs.1,64,45,520/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected under complete scrutiny through CASS. 2 The reasons for scrutiny are undisclosed income reported by ld. PCIT after online verification of cash deposited during demonetization period and high value receipt of cash shown from third parties in response ... show-cause notice as under :- “(a) The case was picked up for scrutiny and following issues were identified for examination by the AO. 4  Undisclosed income reported by PCIT after online verification of cash deposit during demonetization period  High value receipt of cash shown from third parties in response data