BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

256 results for “TDS”+ Undisclosed Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai712Delhi642Chennai272Kolkata256Bangalore174Hyderabad169Jaipur157Ahmedabad99Cochin87Chandigarh49Indore44Rajkot35Nagpur31Surat27Pune26Guwahati24Lucknow21Agra20Karnataka20Cuttack17Raipur17Jodhpur16Allahabad16Amritsar16Patna13Dehradun9Visakhapatnam8Varanasi7Ranchi5Jabalpur4Telangana4Punjab & Haryana2Gauhati1Calcutta1Kerala1Panaji1

Key Topics

Addition to Income84Section 143(3)83TDS56Section 6843Section 14735Disallowance34Section 25030Section 4027Deduction26Section 148

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI GOPAL KUMAR NAREDI, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2062/KOL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271Section 271A

undisclosed income u/s. 271 AAB(1) (c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter, the ‘Act’ in short] by observing as under:- 1 I.T.A No. 2062/Kol/2017 A.Y 2015-16 Shri Gopal Kumar Naredi. “5. In this case, the assessee has made disclosure during the statement recorded under Oath u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act 1961. The assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. INDUSTRIAL SAFETY PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,, KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 256 · Page 1 of 13

...
24
Section 143(2)23
Section 194C22

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2128/KOL/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. (Shri) Arjun Lal Saini, Am ]

Section 132Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271ASection 274

TDS was Rs. 7,07,027/-. After the assessment, there was a demand of Rs. 1,06,834/-, though the assessment was completed as per the returned income of the assessee including the undisclosed

SUBHAJIT KR. GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-XXV, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 685/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2011-12

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 271A

undisclosed income was duly offered to tax before filing the income tax return as specified u/s 139(1) of the Act. During search proceedings, no detection of concealed income was found by the Revenue. Therefore, there was no concealed income declared by assessee 4.1 The amount seized by search team for ₹2,35,600/- was claimed as pre- paid

HARBANS LAL MALHOTRA & SONS PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T CIR - 3,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 421/KOL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2004-05 Harbans Lal Malhotra & V/S. Acit, Circle-3, Ayakar Sons Pvt. Ltd., Malhotra Bhawan, 4Th Floor, P-7, House, P-12, New Cit Chowringhee Square, Road, Kolkata – 700 073 Kolkata – 700 069 [Pan No Aaach 6617 F] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)

income and claimed the full credit of the TDS. Accordingly the AO has added the undisclosed income for the above

DCIT, CIR-10(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S SONODYNE TELEVISION CO. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 330/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 330/Kol/2016 Assessment Year :2011-12 Dcit, Circle-10(2), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Sonodyne Television Co. Ltd. [Pan: Aaecs 7096 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri Anup Sinha
Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

undisclosed income and added to the total income of the assessee under the head income from other sources. 10 M/s Sonodyne Television Co. Ltd. A.Yr. 2011-12 15. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that it has not received any income as discussed above from the aforesaid parties

DCIT, CIRCLE - 33, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI BINOY PODDAR, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeal of revenue as well as cross objection of assessee are dismissed

ITA 1549/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(3)

income is to be estimated out of the undisclosed transactions of sales and purchases. Accordingly, we have no hesitation in confirming the action of CIT(A) in deleting the addition. Hence, this ground of revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 8. The next issue in this appeal of revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of expenses

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. SPPL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 22/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P. M. Jagtap & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 80Section 80ISection 80l

undisclosed income ignoring the fact that such difference ignoring the fact that such difference was on account of rental receipt of Rs.70,09,943/ s on account of rental receipt of Rs.70,09,943/- and reimbursement of electricity charges and generator charges for which net income (receipt icity charges and generator charges for which net income (receipt icity charges

ACIT, CIRCLE - 10(2), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. EMAMI FRANK ROSS LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 529/KOL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 529/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Acit Circle 10(2) Kolkata..............................…………………………............................Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 069. Emami Frank Ross Ltd.....................…………………………………………………….........Respondent 7, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata – 700 013. [Pan: Aaacf 3726 D] Appearances By: Shri Imlimeren Jamir, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri S.K. Agarwal, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 14, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 22, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – 5, Kolkata Dated 04.12.2017 On The Following Grounds: “1. The Cit(A) Has Erred In Restricting The Disallowance Of Rs. 61,78,614/- To Rs. 3,12,796/- Ignoring The Fact That During The Stage Of Re-Assessment Proceeding The Claim Of The Assessee Could Not Be Verified In Absence Of Necessary Details Of Sales & Supporting Books Of Accounts & At The Appellate Stage The Assessee Failed To Reconcile The Sale Amount Vis-A-Vis Gross Receipts As Per Tds Certificate & Tds Thereon. 2. The Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Going Into The Fact That The Assessee Has Only Furnished A Branch Wise Break Up Of Sales But Has Not Submitted Any Supporting Documentary Evidences Regarding Inclusion Of Above Receipts From M/S. Dishnet Wireless Ltd. & M/S. Amalgamated Bean Coffee Trading Co. Ltd.”

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

TDS amount against miscellaneous income instead of respective heads and it was due to this mistake that the AO treated the amount of Rs. 56,00236/- as the undisclosed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1729/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, DR
Section 14ASection 68Section 69C

undisclosed income. Any action on the contrary shall be viewed adversely. Further, in respect of pending assessment proceedings also, assessing officers should rely upon the evidences/materials gathered during the course of search/survey operations or thereafter while framing the relevant assessment orders Yours faithfully,” 12.5. A perusal of the above circular also shows that it is in the notice

DEPUTY COMMISSOENR OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. DOLLAR HOLDING PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1728/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsyan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, DR
Section 14ASection 68Section 69C

undisclosed income. Any action on the contrary shall be viewed adversely. Further, in respect of pending assessment proceedings also, assessing officers should rely upon the evidences/materials gathered during the course of search/survey operations or thereafter while framing the relevant assessment orders Yours faithfully,” 12.5. A perusal of the above circular also shows that it is in the notice

DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, MIDNAPORE, PASCHIM MEDINIPUR vs. M/S. GRAMI AGRO PVT. LTD., PASCHIM MEDINIPUR

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 755/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Years:2007-08

Section 133ASection 133A(3)(i)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40

income from undisclosed sources based on voluntary disclosure of the assessee during the course of survey u/s. 133A on 2.6.03.2007. ITA No.755/Kol/2011 A.Y.2007-08 DCIT, Cir-2, Mid. V. M/s Grami Agro Pvt. Ltd. Page 2 ii. the Ld. CIT(A) is erred in deleting the additions of Rs.9,87,919/- made u/s 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction

M/S KALPANA BIRI MFG. CO. PVT. LTD.,MURSHIDABAD vs. ACIT, CIR- MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1020/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Nov 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11 M/S Kalpana Biri Mfg. Co. Acit, Circle, बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., Vill. & P.O. Murshidabad, 39 R.N. V/S. Auragabad Dist. Tagore Road, P.O. Murshidabad, Berhampur, Pin. 742 101 Pin-742 201 [Pan No. Aabck 7051 M] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri S.L. Kochar, Advocate & अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 18-09-2017 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 10-11-2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxvi, Kolkata Dated 31.03.2014. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-Murshidabad U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 13.02.2013 For Assessment Year 2010-11. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Erred In Not Having Deleted The Addition To Income For Rs.30628425/- As Alleged Unexplained Investment U/S 69 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On Account Of Alleged Suppression Of Value Of Stock.”

Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 69

undisclosed income would be none taken 3 crore. I am giving you a chance to disclose the income which you have considered in this current year till date. Ans 8: Sir, I am accepting the survey finding and on the basis of survey finding I am disclosing Rs. 3.00 crore as additional income in this current year and immediately paying

V.K.PURI.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIR - 26,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1905/KOL/2012[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2016AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 144Section 147Section 148

undisclosed income. But actually these are 3 FDs in the name of the assessee, his wife and one daughter – Neha Puri. The ld. AR drew our attention to pages 115 to 117 of the paper book where it was seen from the bank statement that a sum of Rs. 48,000.00 each were deposited in FD account in the above

V.K.PURI.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIR - 26,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1904/KOL/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 144Section 147Section 148

undisclosed income. But actually these are 3 FDs in the name of the assessee, his wife and one daughter – Neha Puri. The ld. AR drew our attention to pages 115 to 117 of the paper book where it was seen from the bank statement that a sum of Rs. 48,000.00 each were deposited in FD account in the above

DCIT, C.C. I, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. AMARNATH SHROFF, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

ITA 1494/KOL/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Pande, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

undisclosed bank accounts and seized papers/documents. Thereafter there is a reference to the Assessee’s offer to tax income to the extent mentioned above. The AO has accepted such offer to tax of income and completed the Assessment. The order of assessment makes a reference to initiation of penalty proceedings as follows :- “Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated

AMAR NATH SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA

In the result ITA Nos.1797 to 1800/Kol/2009 are allowed while ITA Nos

ITA 1797/KOL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Pande, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

undisclosed bank accounts and seized papers/documents. Thereafter there is a reference to the Assessee’s offer to tax income to the extent mentioned above. The AO has accepted such offer to tax of income and completed the Assessment. The order of assessment makes a reference to initiation of penalty proceedings as follows :- “Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is initiated

INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD-28, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SUCHISMITA MAJUMDER, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2648/KOL/2013[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Dr.A.L. Saini, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-28,Kolkata Vs. Suchismitamajumder, Aayakarbhawandakshin, 2, 49/58, Prince Golammd Gariahat Road (South), Shah Road, Kolkata-700033 Kolkata-700068

For Appellant: Pravin Luharka, CAFor Respondent: Shri BaniBrata Dutta, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 154

undisclosed commission income by holding that commission was disclosed in A.Y. 2005-06, though TDS was claimed in A.Y. 2006-07. 2.Whether

KRYPTON DISTRIBUTORS LLP (EARLIER KNOWN AS KRYPTON DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD.,),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 12(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1733/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Krypton Distributors Llp (Earlier Known As Krypton Ito, Ward 12(1), Distributors P. Ltd.) Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Flat No.1A, 1, Abdul Rasul Chowringhee Square, Vs. Avenue, Kalighat, Kolkata-700069, West Bengal Kolkata-700026, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadck5298G Assessee By : Shri Manoj Katuruka, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Pandey, Dr Date Of Hearing: 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.12.2025

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Katuruka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68

TDS of ₹45,962/- deducted and net amount of ₹41,3,654/- was credited into the bank account of the assessee. In this background, now the issue before us is whether the sales consideration received by the assessee for 40 lacs 2% non-cumulative redeemable preference of M/s Easter (India) Chemicals Ltd. is genuine or liable to be added

I.T.O WD - 1(1),ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. M/S EAST INDIA MINING & POWER ASSOCIATES, PURULIA

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

ITA 2520/KOL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69C

undisclosed income of the taxpayer. Levy of tax, interest and penalty, in all such cases, would be clearly unwarranted and unsustainable in law. In this view of the matter, we find no reason to interfere into the order of Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we uphold the order of Ld. CIT(A) and ground raised by Revenue is dismissed

ITO, WARD-40(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHADEOLAL NATHMAL, KOLKATA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1902/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini,Am] I.T. A No. 1902/Kol/2016 A.Y 2010-11 I.T.O. Ward 40(1), Kolkata V/S. M/S. Mahadeo Lal Nathmal Pan: Aaffmo 501M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl.CIT, ld.DRFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate, ld.AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

undisclosed income, we beg to submit as under: ' M/s. Tata Motors Ltd made a provision of Rs. 2639549/­ on account of increase in Driver wages @ Rs. 20/­ per day on 31.03.2010 and deducted TDS