← 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

Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for all the A

ITA 7/VIZ/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.4/Viz/2023 To 7/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17) Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Dr.No.26-3-560, Sln Towers Income Tax Iv Floor, B.V.Nagar Central Circle-1 Mini Bypass Road Guntur Nellore [Pan : Abofs2978J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Visakhapatnam-3 Dated 30.11.2022 For The Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2013-14 To 2016-17. Since The Grounds Raised In These Appeals Are Common, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & A Common Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience As Under. Facts Are Extracted From I.T.A.4/Viz/2023 .

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145

following additions : 3 I.T.A. No.4/Viz/2023 to 7/Viz/2023, A.Y.2013-14 to 2016-17 Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore 1. Unexplained cash credits : Rs.85,16,495/- 2. Estimation of income @8% on main contracts and 4% on sub contracts : Rs.66,31,375/- 3. Aggrieved by the additions made by the AO, the assessee firm ... expenditure incurred. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) would have appreciated that the Assessing Officer has estimated the income without rejecting the books under section 145 of the I.T.Act and hence would have treated the estimation as invalid. 4. On the facts

Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for all the A

ITA 6/VIZ/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.4/Viz/2023 To 7/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17) Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Dr.No.26-3-560, Sln Towers Income Tax Iv Floor, B.V.Nagar Central Circle-1 Mini Bypass Road Guntur Nellore [Pan : Abofs2978J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Visakhapatnam-3 Dated 30.11.2022 For The Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2013-14 To 2016-17. Since The Grounds Raised In These Appeals Are Common, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & A Common Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience As Under. Facts Are Extracted From I.T.A.4/Viz/2023 .

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145

following additions : 3 I.T.A. No.4/Viz/2023 to 7/Viz/2023, A.Y.2013-14 to 2016-17 Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore 1. Unexplained cash credits : Rs.85,16,495/- 2. Estimation of income @8% on main contracts and 4% on sub contracts : Rs.66,31,375/- 3. Aggrieved by the additions made by the AO, the assessee firm ... expenditure incurred. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) would have appreciated that the Assessing Officer has estimated the income without rejecting the books under section 145 of the I.T.Act and hence would have treated the estimation as invalid. 4. On the facts

Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for all the A

ITA 5/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.4/Viz/2023 To 7/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17) Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Dr.No.26-3-560, Sln Towers Income Tax Iv Floor, B.V.Nagar Central Circle-1 Mini Bypass Road Guntur Nellore [Pan : Abofs2978J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Visakhapatnam-3 Dated 30.11.2022 For The Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2013-14 To 2016-17. Since The Grounds Raised In These Appeals Are Common, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & A Common Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience As Under. Facts Are Extracted From I.T.A.4/Viz/2023 .

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145

following additions : 3 I.T.A. No.4/Viz/2023 to 7/Viz/2023, A.Y.2013-14 to 2016-17 Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore 1. Unexplained cash credits : Rs.85,16,495/- 2. Estimation of income @8% on main contracts and 4% on sub contracts : Rs.66,31,375/- 3. Aggrieved by the additions made by the AO, the assessee firm ... expenditure incurred. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) would have appreciated that the Assessing Officer has estimated the income without rejecting the books under section 145 of the I.T.Act and hence would have treated the estimation as invalid. 4. On the facts

Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Guntur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for all the A

ITA 4/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.4/Viz/2023 To 7/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17) Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Dr.No.26-3-560, Sln Towers Income Tax Iv Floor, B.V.Nagar Central Circle-1 Mini Bypass Road Guntur Nellore [Pan : Abofs2978J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.V.Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 02.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: These Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)], Visakhapatnam-3 Dated 30.11.2022 For The Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2013-14 To 2016-17. Since The Grounds Raised In These Appeals Are Common, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together & A Common Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience As Under. Facts Are Extracted From I.T.A.4/Viz/2023 .

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.N.Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 145

following additions : 3 I.T.A. No.4/Viz/2023 to 7/Viz/2023, A.Y.2013-14 to 2016-17 Sri Lakshmi Constructions, Nellore 1. Unexplained cash credits : Rs.85,16,495/- 2. Estimation of income @8% on main contracts and 4% on sub contracts : Rs.66,31,375/- 3. Aggrieved by the additions made by the AO, the assessee firm ... expenditure incurred. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) would have appreciated that the Assessing Officer has estimated the income without rejecting the books under section 145 of the I.T.Act and hence would have treated the estimation as invalid. 4. On the facts

M/S. Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rourkla vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Sambalpur

In the result, appeals of the assessee in IT(SS)A No

ITA 109/CTK/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.31 To 33/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017 To 2018-2019) M/S Bee Pee Rollers Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3593 P & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.34 To 39/Ctk/2022 & आयकर अऩीऱ/Ita No.109/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2017 To 2020-2021) M/S Bajrangbali Steel Industries Pvt. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Ltd., Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aabcb 3594 L & आयकर अऩीऱ (तऱाशियाां और अशिग्रहण)/It(Ss)A Nos.40 To 44/Ctk/2022 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-2015 To 2018-2019) M/S Bajrangbali Re-Rollers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Acit, Central Circle, Sambalpur Lal Building, Kachery Road, Rourkela, Sundergarh, Odisha-769012 Pan No. :Aaccb 6678 A (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Shri B.K. Tibrewal, Ca & Ms. Nisha Rachh, Ca Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr.Cit(Osd) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/03/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2023

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate with Shri
Section 133ASection 153ASection 292CSection 69Section 69C

assessment years. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) after rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee went on to estimate the income of the assessee by determining the profit on the alleged unproved purchases at 10% and the unproved sales at 5%. It was the submission ... unproved purchases and unproved sales. It was, therefore, the submission that the estimation of 10% of the alleged unproved purchases and the estimation of income at 5% of the alleged unproved sales as made by the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 8. In reply, ld. Pr.CIT

Sai Organic Farms, Madurai vs. PCIT, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 351/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkery, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 351/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sai Organic Farms The Principal Commissioner Of 105, K K Nagar, V. Income-Tax, Madurai – 625 020. Madurai-1, [Pan: Adgfs-1287-E] Madurai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. M. Rajan, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.03.2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.03.2023

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. M. Rajan, CIT
Section 144Section 263

aside the scrutiny /best judgement assessment without taking into consideration the detailed discussion and findings rendered in the assessment order in relation the estimation of income from agricultural activities demonstrating the substitution of the view taken by the Assessing Officer, thereby vitiating the revision order on various facets ... evidence for income derived from agricultural activities. Therefore, the AO has completed assessment u/s. 144 of the :-4-: ITA. No:351/Chny/2022 Act and estimated agricultural income of Rs. 33,16,600/- and made addition of Rs. 5,72,452/- under the head ‘income from other sources’. The AO, while estimating