← 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

Kolors Healthcare LLP, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad

ITA 937/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.930 To 936/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2019-20) M/S. Kolors Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Pan:Aadck8392B (Appellant) Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) C.O. Nos.15 To 21/Hyd/2024 (In Ita Nos.930 To 936/Hyd/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2019-20) (By Revenue) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.937 To 941/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2015-16 To 2019-20) M/S. Kolors Healthcare Llp, Hyderabad. Pan:Aaofk6305L (Appellant) Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) C.O. Nos.22 To 26/Hyd/2024 (In Ita Nos.937 To 941/Hyd/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2015-16 To 2019-20) (By Revenue) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा/Revenue By: Ms.K. Haritha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 23/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : All These Appeals Filed By M/S. Kolors Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd. ("Assessee") & M/S. Kolors Healthcare Llp & Cross Objections Filed By Revenue, Are Arising Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad ("Ld. Cit(A)") As Detailed Above. Since Identical Issues Are Involved In These Appeals & Cross Objections ("C.O.”), They Are Heard Together & Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.K. Haritha, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 44A

ought to have adopted the average net profit of 5% instead of 15% of the impugned sales of 14,41,96,147/- while estimating the income. 5.2 Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case before resorting ... estimation of income at 15% of the impugned sales. 5.3 Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in estimating the net profit margin of 15% on the impugned sales without any reasonable basis which is against principles of natural justice. 5.4 Without prejudice to other grounds

Kolors Healthcare India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-3(4), Hydreabad

ITA 930/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ. अपी.सं / Ita Nos.930 To 936/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2019-20) M/S. Kolors Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Pan:Aadck8392B (Appellant) Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Hyderabad. (Respondent) C.O. Nos.15 To 21/Hyd/2024 (In Ita Nos.930 To 936/Hyd/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2013-14 To 2019-20) (By Revenue) आ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.937 To 941/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2015-16 To 2019-20) M/S. Kolors Healthcare Llp, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Vs. Central Circle-3(4), Pan:Aaofk6305L Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. Nos.22 To 26/Hyd/2024 (In Ita Nos.937 To 941/Hyd/2024) (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2015-16 To 2019-20) (By Revenue) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. राजस्व द्वारा/Revenue By: Ms.K. Haritha, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 04/12/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncer G/Pronouncement: 23/01/2025 आदेश/Order Per Bench : All These Appeals Filed By M/S. Kolors Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd. (“Assessee") & M/S. Kolors Healthcare Llp & Cross Objections Filed By Revenue, Are Arising Out Of Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Hyderabad (“Ld. Cit(A)") As Detailed Above. Since Identical Issues Are Involved In These Appeals & Cross Objections ("C.O.”), They Are Heard Together & Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms.K. Haritha, CIT-DR
Section 44A

ought to have adopted the average net profit of 5% instead of 15% of the impugned sales of 14,41,96,147/- while estimating the income. 5.2 Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case before resorting ... estimation of income at 15% of the impugned sales. 5.3 Without prejudice to other grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in estimating the net profit margin of 15% on the impugned sales without any reasonable basis which is against principles of natural justice. 5.4 Without prejudice to other grounds