← 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

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Agri Gold Foods and Farm Products Limited, Vijayawada

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 762/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Haritha Mohana Agro Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 219/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Haritha Mohana Agro Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 217/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Haritha Mohana Agro Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 216/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Nagavalli Planters Private Limited, Vijayawada

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 15/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(4), Hyderabad vs. Nagavalli Planters Private Limited, Vijayawada

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 14/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Avva Venkata Rama Rao, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1999/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

Avva Venkata Rama Rao, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1998/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri K. Narasimha Charyappeal In Ita No Appellant Respondent A.Y 1998/Hyd/2017 Sri Avva Venkata Dy.Cit, Central Circle 2(4) 2013-14 Rama Rao, Hyderabad Vijayawada Pan:Abspa6432H 1999/Hyd/2017 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 14/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Nagavalli Planters (P) Ltd., 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Vijayawada Hyderabad Pan:Aaccn5193Q 15/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 762/Hyd/2018 -Do- Agri Gold & Farm Products 2014-15 Ltd, Hyderabad Pan:Aabca8733E 216/Hyd/2018 Dy.Cit, Central Haritha Moana Agro 2012-13 Circle 2(4) Projects (P) Ltd, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabch8633E 217/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 219/Hyd/2018 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 Assessee By: Shri M.V. Prasad, Ca Revenue By: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153A

Constructions (P) Ltd for the A.Y 2011-12 directed the Assessing Officer to treat the interest income as income from business and accordingly estimate the income on par with the income from business. However, we find the Tribunal in the case of DCIT, Central Circle vs. Agri Gold Constructions ... original assessment proceedings passed u/s 143(3) on 22.02.2011 wherein the Assessing Officer had adopted the profit rate of 5% for estimation of income of the assessee company. Similarly, he directed the Assessing Officer to consider the interest income as part of business receipts and estimate the profit

DCIT, Coimbatore vs. M/S Srs Trading Company, Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 938/CHNY/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.938/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-2020 & C.O. No. 15/Chny/2022 [In Ita No. 938/Chny/2022] The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Srs Trading Company, Income Tax, Central Circle 1, 23/4, Venkatachalam Street, No. 63, Race Course Road, Erode 638 001. Coimbatore 641 018. [Pan:Adifs8621A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) Department By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit Assessee By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 19, Chennai, Dated 26.07.2022 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2019-20. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Under: 1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case & In Law. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Holding That The Action Of The Assessing Officer In Estimating The Suppression Of Sales @ 200% By Extrapolation Based On The Evidence Available For 3 Months Is Not Acceptable.

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 133A

balances, the same was continuing to be shown in the books of account. Hence, it is clear that the CIT's observation regarding estimation of income on the basis of extrapolation in the absence of evidence and quantification of undisclosed income without matching with the assets found or expenditure incurred ... period from April, 2018 to June, 2018, the Assessing Officer has calculated the unaccounted sales for the entire financial year 2018-19 and estimated the income on the basis of extrapolation in the absence of evidence and quantified the total income of the assessee