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.

18 results for “TDS”+ Undisclosed Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai678Delhi602Chennai266Kolkata210Bangalore174Hyderabad168Jaipur157Ahmedabad99Cochin87Chandigarh40Indore39Rajkot33Nagpur25Pune24Guwahati23Lucknow21Agra20Karnataka20Surat18Jodhpur16Raipur15Allahabad13Amritsar13Patna12Cuttack11Dehradun9Varanasi5Visakhapatnam5Telangana4Ranchi4Jabalpur4Punjab & Haryana2Kerala1Calcutta1Panaji1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income14Section 271(1)(c)10Section 2508Cash Deposit8TDS8Section 1477Disallowance7Section 1446Section 1486Section 143(3)

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH vs. M/S. J.K. JEWELLERS, BHARUCH

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the Revenue, is dismissed

ITA 440/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat19 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.440/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Hearing) The Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Bharuch. Station Road, Near Rungta School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.443/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, Station Road, Near Rungta Bharuch. School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

TDS was deducted. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in deleting addition on account of unexplained investment for purchase in stock-in-trade of Rs.1,61,74,000/- by stating that source of income for Rs.2.55 crore has been offered to tax and therefore separate addition

M/S. J.K. JEWELLERS,BHARUCH vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHARUCH

In the result, ground No.3 raised by the Revenue, is dismissed

6
Section 685
Section 2635
ITA 443/SRT/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed
ITAT Surat
19 Sept 2023
AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.440/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Virtual Hearing) The Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Bharuch. Station Road, Near Rungta School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.443/Srt/2018 Assessment Year: (2014-15) M/S. J. K. Jewellers, Vs. The Acit, Circle-1, Station Road, Near Rungta Bharuch. School, Bharuch. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaefj5951F (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

TDS was deducted. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in deleting addition on account of unexplained investment for purchase in stock-in-trade of Rs.1,61,74,000/- by stating that source of income for Rs.2.55 crore has been offered to tax and therefore separate addition

NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT

ITA 136/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

income disclosed under IDS- 2016\nfor Rs.8,27,26,466/-, the balance amount of Rs.9,47,10,534/- was bifurcated as\nundisclosed profit in the ratio of 45:45:10 amongst the assessee, Shri Sunny J.\nPatel and Shri Bharat Kalidas Patel. Accordingly, Rs.4,26,19,740/- (45 % of\nRs.9,47,10,534/-) was confirmed as undisclosed profit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

ITA 164/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
Section 147Section 250

income disclosed under IDS- 2016\nfor Rs.8,27,26,466/-, the balance amount of Rs.9,47,10,534/- was bifurcated as\nundisclosed profit in the ratio of 45:45:10 amongst the assessee, Shri Sunny J.\nPatel and Shri Bharat Kalidas Patel. Accordingly, Rs.4,26,19,740/- (45 % of\nRs.9,47,10,534/-) was confirmed as undisclosed profit

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR - 4, SURAT vs. NARESHKUMAR B. AGARWAL, SURAT

ITA 163/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2013-14
Section 147Section 250

income disclosed under IDS- 2016\nfor Rs.8,27,26,466/-, the balance amount of Rs.9,47,10,534/- was bifurcated as\nundisclosed profit in the ratio of 45:45:10 amongst the assessee, Shri Sunny J.\nPatel and Shri Bharat Kalidas Patel. Accordingly, Rs.4,26,19,740/- (45 % of\nRs.9,47,10,534/-) was confirmed as undisclosed profit

VIRAL SHAILESH SHAH,VALSAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, VALSAD, VALSAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 536/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.536/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Viral Shailesh Shah, Vs. The Acit, C/O. Dr. Shailesh V. Shah, B/H. Valsad Circle, Pramanik Store, Opp. Atul First Valsad Gate, Atul, Valsad – 396020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bfaps6008A (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 139Section 144Section 148Section 151(1)Section 234A

undisclosed income and the same was added to the total income of the assessee. This way, Assessing Officer made total addition of Rs.10,46,524/- (Rs.5,00,000 + Rs. Rs.5,45,524) 7. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who has confirmed the action of Assessing Officer

DINABEN DILIPKUMAR PATEL,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAVSARI, NAVSARI

In the result, ground related to the credit entry of Rs

ITA 69/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

TDS was made on interest income and the same cannot be considered as undisclosed income as no return of income

DINABEN DILIPKUMAR PATEL,NA vs. ASRIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAVSARI

In the result, ground related to the credit entry of Rs

ITA 337/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

TDS was made on interest income and the same cannot be considered as undisclosed income as no return of income

SHREE KUBERJI DEVELOPERS,SURAT vs. ACIT CICLE-3(2), NEW CIRCLE -1(1)(1), SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 1075/SRT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

TDS was also deducted.\nThe assessee was issued show cause notice which was not replied to. Hence,\nAO added the difference of Rs.7,78,070/- [17,20,000 – 9,41,930] to the\ntotal income. He also added undisclosed

GEETA PRINTS PVT. LTD.,SURAT vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1)(1), SURAT., SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1322/SRT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1322/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Geeta Prints Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Income Tax Officer, 150, Gidc, Pandesara, Vs. Ward -1(1)(1), Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Surat-394 221 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacg 88182R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Rajesh C. Shah, Ar राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 03/06/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 249Section 250

income in respect of undisclosed TDS and also the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same. 4. The learned

ARJUNSINH HARISINH THAKOR,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BARDOLI

In the result, grounds No

ITA 245/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Arjunsinh Harisinh Thakor, I.T.O., 1 Thakor Niwas, Zanda Chowk, Ward-1, Vs. Tarasadi Road, Kosamba, Bardoli. Surat-394120. Pan No. Aabpt 1270 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 254(1)Section 68

undisclosed income. 4. On the applicability of Section 115BBE of the Act, the assessee submitted that he was wrongly taxed under Section 115BBE of the Act, such provisions in the statute took came only after announcement of demonetization on 08/11/2016. Before that rate of taxation under Section 4 Arjunsinh Harisinh Thakor Vs ITO 115BBE was 35.54% including surcharge and cess

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURAT vs. HAYWOOD HOSPITALITY(INDIA) PVT. LTD, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 880/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms Suchitra Kambledeputy Commissioner Of Haywood Hospitality(India) Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Surat 1St Floor, Gujarat Jhm Hotels Ltd., Near Bharti Park, Athwalines, Surat. [Pan : Aabcj9651 N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit(Dr) Respondent By: Shri Hiren R Vepari, Ar Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Hiren R Vepari, AR
Section 250Section 40Section 40a

undisclosed receipts even though the assessee claimed credits for TDS on these receipts without taking into consideration for computation of total income

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1, BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 329/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 111ASection 16Section 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

TDS had been deducted thereupon, but the assessee failed to file the return of income/computation of income. Therefore, the salary income of Rs.82,12,480/- was added to the total income without allowing deductions u/s.24(b) and Chapter VIA therefrom. 5.3 With regard to purchase of equity shares, AO on perusal of P & L statement furnished by the assessee, noticed

SATHAIYA GANAPATHY,PUDUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 1 , BARDOLI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 330/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329 & 330/Srt/2025 Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Sathaiya Ganapathy, Vs. Ito, Ts No.4114, South 3 Rd Street, Ward – 1, Pukukottai, Tamil Nadu - 622001 Bardoli "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahbpg2414Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) Appellant By Shri Mayank A. Ogriwala, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

Section 111ASection 16Section 24Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

TDS had been deducted thereupon, but the assessee failed to file the return of income/computation of income. Therefore, the salary income of Rs.82,12,480/- was added to the total income without allowing deductions u/s.24(b) and Chapter VIA therefrom. 5.3 With regard to purchase of equity shares, AO on perusal of P & L statement furnished by the assessee, noticed

SHRI LALCHAND DHARIWAL,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(3),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2623/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2623/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 Shri Lalchand P. Dhariwal, Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/S. Adinath Textile , Ward- 1(2)(3) Surat O-21-23 Bombay Market Umarwada Surat Pan: Aatpd 0682 Q अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 133(6)Section 143Section 68

undisclosed income interest is not pressed before us by the learned counsel for the assessee, ex-consequenti, it is treated as dismissed as not pressed. Lalchand P Dhariwal v. ITO-Wd-1(2)(30 Surat/ I.T.A.No. 2623/Ahd/2016/A.Y. 12-13 Page 8 of 10 13. Ground No. 4 relates to confirming addition of Rs. 1,98,750 as unexplained investment / expenditure

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, SURA, SURAT vs. PIPODRA TEXTILE PARK LLP, SURAT

ITA 795/SRT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.795/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Hybrid Hearing) Acit, Vs. Pipodra Textile Park Llp, S No.85, Vilol. Lindiad, Tal: Central Circle-3, Mangrol, Surat - 395002 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasfp8206B (Appellant) (Respondent) ""या"ेप सं /Co No.27/Srt/2024 (Ay 2018-19) (A/O Ita No.795/Srt/2024 Pipodra Textile Park Llp Vs. Acit, S No.85, Vilol. Lindiad, Tal: Central Circle-3, Mangrol, Surat– 395 002 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aasfp 8206 B (Co-Objector) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ca राज"वक" ओर से /Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025

Section 153CSection 250

TDS at the applicable rate. The sale consideration in the registered deed was as per the prevailing market rate, which is not in dispute. In the original return of income, the assessee had declared long-term capital gain (LTCG) of Rs.32,08,45,282/- on sale of the impugned land. The same amount has again been declared in the return

ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), SURAT vs. SHRI ARVINDBHAI RATANBHAI MOKANI, SURAT

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 139/SRT/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) I.T.O., Arvindbhai Ratanbhai Mokani, Ward-3(3)(1), D-260-261, Vittal Nagar Society, Vs. Surat. Varachha Road, Hira Baug, Surat-395006. Pan No. Ahfpm 2302 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 144Section 254(1)

undisclosed sales consideration, the assessee explained that on the basis of AIR information, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee sold non-agricultural land situated at Gavier village jointly with other persons at Rs. 10.00 crores, on which the assessee received Rs. 1.50 crore as his share on various dates. To verify the investment as well as sale consideration

SHANKAR ZETHABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.124/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Shankar Zethabhai Patel, Vs. The Pcit(Central), 505, Sraynik Park Appartment, Rander Surat. Road, Surat – 395009. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Cfepp7235M Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) 15/06/2023 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2023

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

TDS out of Rs. 70 lacs. The amount actually paid is evident from the bank statement as explained herein above. 3. Your honour has raised another issue that assessee has shown the turnover of Rs.31,35,000/- for the purpose of section 44AD whereas the credit entries appearing in bank accounts is Rs.1,20,44,870/- including cash deposit