← 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

Abu Mansur Ali, Kolkata vs. DCIT, CC-Xviii, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee, is allowed

ITA 92/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.92/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2009-2010) Abu Mansur Ali, Vs. Dcit, Cc-Xviii, Kolkata, Raigachi, Azadnagar, Rajarhat, 110, Shanti Pally, E.M.Bye Pass Kolkata-700135 Kasba, Kolkata-700107 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Ajwpa 0693 E .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.M.Surana, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 06/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 22/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2009-2010, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Central-Ii, Kolkata In Appeal No.94/Cc-Xviii/Cit(A)C-Ii/11-12, Dated 19.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 31.12.2010. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That A Search & Seizure Operations U/S 132 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Were Conducted In The M/S.Kaushalya Infrastructure Group Of Cases On 26/27.03.2009 & On Subsequent Dates (At Certain Spots). This Included Search Also At The Residence Of The Assessee At Vill: Raigachi, Azad Nagar, Rajarhat, 24 Pgs(N), Kolkata-136 By Virtue Of A Search Warrant Dated 25.03.2009. During The Course Of Search Some Diaries & Documents/Papers Vide Id Marks Ama/L To Ama/7 As Per Annexure-'A' Were Found & Seized. Besides, Cash Of Rs.8,300/ Was Also Found But Hot Seized Vide Anneure-2

For Appellant: Shri S.M.surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271A

meant for declaration in the return of income because no return was filed for the preceding year. Further, the AO has made estimation of income because the appellant has failed to substantiate the profit declared by him in the return of income. Again, in the 'course of appellate proceedings

ACIT, Chennai vs. Shri Chidri Venkata Narasimha Rayal, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2263/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2263/Mds/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Asstt. Commissioner Of Shri Chidri Venkata Narasimha Income Tax, V. Rayal, Non-Corporate Circle-1(1), No.3, Vigneshwara Apartments, 1St Floor, New No.9, Periyar Road, Chennai-34. T. Nagar, Chennai – 17. [Pan: Abspn 0788 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Shiva Srinivas, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. Devanathan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2017 आदेश आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per D.S. Sunder Singh:

For Appellant: Shri Shiva Srinivas, JCITFor Respondent: Shri N. Devanathan, Advocate

contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to estimate the income of the assessee @ 1.5% of the gross turnover, as against 3.5% adopted by the Assessing Officer without appreciating the fact that the assessee ... aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored. 3.0 All the grounds of appeal are related to the estimation of income by the Assessing Officer. The assessee is engaged in the trading and export of onions, chillies, maize, ground nuts etc., For the assessment year 2011-12, the assessee filed

DCIT, Salem vs. Shri P. Anbazhagan, Komarapalayam

ITA 2183/CHNY/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2174 To 2178/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2002-03, 2003-04,2004-05,2005-06 & 2006-07 Smt. A. Jothimani, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2183/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri P. Anbazhagan Income Tax, V. No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, Central Circle, Bye-Pass Road, Salem. Komarapalayam-638183 Pan : Aavpa7006J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2172 & 2173/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S. Anburaj Exports, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Shreekanth, JCIT
Section 132Section 153CSection 68

have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Admittedly the search took place on 10.11.2005. The estimation of income is for the assessment year 2005-06. The time limit for filing the return of income expired on 30.07.2005. From the order

P.Anbazhagan, Komarapalayam vs. DCIT, Salem

ITA 2179/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2174 To 2178/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2002-03, 2003-04,2004-05,2005-06 & 2006-07 Smt. A. Jothimani, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2183/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri P. Anbazhagan Income Tax, V. No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, Central Circle, Bye-Pass Road, Salem. Komarapalayam-638183 Pan : Aavpa7006J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2172 & 2173/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S. Anburaj Exports, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Shreekanth, JCIT
Section 132Section 153CSection 68

have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Admittedly the search took place on 10.11.2005. The estimation of income is for the assessment year 2005-06. The time limit for filing the return of income expired on 30.07.2005. From the order

A. Jothimani, Komarapalayam vs. DCIT, Salem

ITA 2178/CHNY/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2174 To 2178/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2002-03, 2003-04,2004-05,2005-06 & 2006-07 Smt. A. Jothimani, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2183/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri P. Anbazhagan Income Tax, V. No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, Central Circle, Bye-Pass Road, Salem. Komarapalayam-638183 Pan : Aavpa7006J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2172 & 2173/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S. Anburaj Exports, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Shreekanth, JCIT
Section 132Section 153CSection 68

have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Admittedly the search took place on 10.11.2005. The estimation of income is for the assessment year 2005-06. The time limit for filing the return of income expired on 30.07.2005. From the order

A. Jothimani, Komarapalayam vs. DCIT, Salem

ITA 2177/CHNY/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2174 To 2178/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years :2002-03, 2003-04,2004-05,2005-06 & 2006-07 Smt. A. Jothimani, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2183/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri P. Anbazhagan Income Tax, V. No.11-D-2, Sivasakthi Nagar, Central Circle, Bye-Pass Road, Salem. Komarapalayam-638183 Pan : Aavpa7006J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 2172 & 2173/Mds/2013 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S. Anburaj Exports, The Deputy Commissioner Of No.11-D, Sivasakthi Nagar, V. Income Tax, Bye-Pass Road, Central Circle, Komarapalayam Salem. Pan : Adopj2834Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A.V. Shreekanth, JCIT
Section 132Section 153CSection 68

have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the material available on record. Admittedly the search took place on 10.11.2005. The estimation of income is for the assessment year 2005-06. The time limit for filing the return of income expired on 30.07.2005. From the order