← All Phrases

“estimation of income”

Assessment ProceduresSection 145Section 1453,061 judgments

The decision most relied on for estimation of income is CIT v. Simit P. Sheth (356 ITR 451), cited in 1,465 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on estimation of income

CIT v. Simit P. Sheth
356 ITR 451 · 2013 · High Court
1,465
citing judgments

When purchases are unproved or presumed to be from the grey market, the entire amount of such purchases should not be disallowed; instead, income can be estimated by applying a reasonable gross profit rate to the unaccounted sales or turnover, especially in assessments arising from search proceedings involving seized documents.

Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
314 ITR 62 · 2009 · Supreme Court
739
citing judgments

A provision for expenses, such as warranty, is a deductible liability for income tax purposes if it constitutes a present obligation arising from past events, and a reliable estimate of the amount of obligation is possible.

Sanjay Oilcake Industries v. CIT
316 ITR 274 · 2009 · High Court
460
citing judgments

In cases of alleged bogus or unverifiable purchases, rather than disallowing the entire purchase value, a reasonable profit element or a proportionate percentage of the purchases should be added back to the assessee's income.

Kachwala Gems v. JCIT
288 ITR 10 · 2007 · Supreme Court
332
citing judgments

In a best judgment assessment, some guesswork is inherent, but the estimate must be fair and not arbitrary. Books of account can be rejected under Section 145(3) if the assessee fails to substantiate entries or prove the genuineness of transactions, leading to estimation of income.

CIT v. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad
72 ITR 194 · 1969 · Supreme Court
272
citing judgments

If there is an unexplained cash credit, the Assessing Officer can treat it as the assessee's income, even when the income is finalized on an estimation basis, without proving its specific source. The onus then shifts to the assessee to prove that the income represented by the cash credit has already been taxed.

Commissioner of Sales Tax v. H.M. Esufali H.M. Abdulali
90 ITR 271 · 1973 · Supreme Court
232
citing judgments

The Supreme Court established principles for best judgment assessments, stating that some guesswork is inevitable but the assessment must be bona fide, rational, and free from bias or capriciousness. An appellate authority cannot substitute its judgment for that of the Assessing Officer unless the AO's assessment is shown to be biased, irrational, vindictive, or capricious, especially when the assessee fails to provide proper accounts or counter-evidence.

CIT v. Balchand Ajit Kumar
263 ITR 610 · 2003 · High Court
212
citing judgments

When making an addition for unaccounted receipts, on-money, or non-genuine purchases/sales, the addition should be restricted to the estimated profit element embedded in such transactions, rather than the entire gross amount, particularly when evidence of corresponding expenditure is incomplete. This estimation often involves applying a net profit rate.

Harigopal Singh v. CIT
258 ITR 85 · 2002 · High Court
203
citing judgments

Penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied when an addition to income is made on an estimated basis without concrete evidence of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The provisions of section 271(1)(c) are not attracted to cases where income is assessed on an estimate basis.

Judgments citing estimation of income

ITO 4(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Enrich Rd Infraprojects P, . Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3190/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3190/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Income Tax Officer 4(1)(4) Enrich Rd Infraprojects Private Ltd (Formerly Known As Rd.Electricals Private Ltd) 6Th Floor, R.No.637-A बनाम/ 30,Gopal Bhavan Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Vs. 2Nd Floor, 199,Princess Street Mumbai- 400 020 Mumbai- 400 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcr-7020-F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Bhupendra Shah, Ld.Ar Revenue By : M.V. Rajguru, Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / : 28/11/2017 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 17/01/2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Bhupendra Shah, Ld.ARFor Respondent: M.V. Rajguru, Ld. DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)

justified. The Ld.CIT(A), upon factual matrix, concurred with the stand of the assessee that rejection of books of accounts and estimation of income @8% was not justified. 5. The alternative additions on account of bogus purchases and trading loss, as proposed by Ld. AO, was also deleted by Ld.CIT ... have carefully heard the rival contentions and perused relevant material on record. So far as rejection of books of accounts and estimation of income @8% is concerned, we find the stand of Ld. CIT(A) quite logical one since the accounts of the assessee were duly audited u/s 44AB