Section 69A of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.104

Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 104 (Unexplained asset) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 104 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 69A is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 of the 15,297 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 69A

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.
374 ITR 645 · 2015 · High Court
1,823
citing judgments

In Section 153A proceedings, the scope of assessment extends to abated proceedings, enabling an assessee to raise fresh legal claims that could have been made in regular assessment proceedings.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

K.P. Varghese v. ITO
131 ITR 597 · 1981 · Supreme Court
989
citing judgments

An addition to income cannot be made merely on the basis of a difference in valuation of assets or a Valuation Officer's report without establishing actual understatement of consideration or the source of unexplained funds through proper enquiry. The Assessing Officer must conduct proper enquiry and satisfy the conditions for making such additions.

PCIT v. Best Infrastructure (India) (P.) Ltd.
397 ITR 82 · 2017 · High Court
786
citing judgments

A statement recorded under Section 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, does not by itself constitute incriminating material for making additions to income.

Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala
91 ITR 18 · 1973 · Supreme Court
666
citing judgments

Admissions, whether made through entries in account books or statements, are important pieces of evidence but are not conclusive. An assessee has the right to demonstrate that an admission made by them is incorrect or can be retracted.

Tin Box Company v. CIT
249 ITR 216 · 2001 · Supreme Court
624
citing judgments

When an issue is remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, the AO must conduct a de novo examination and provide the assessee a full opportunity of being heard. The assessee is bound to comply with the notices issued by the AO.

Judgments on Section 69A

Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Rajkot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1198/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 ] Adj Agri International Llp, The Income Tax Officer, B1 First Floor Panchnath Ward-1(1)(1), Rajkot, Vs. Complex, Kalawad Road Opp. Aaykarbhavan, Race Course St Marrys School, Rajkot, Ring Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Gujarat-360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aatfa9441L (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 05/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section-250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 11.08.2026, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act, Dated 03.03.2026. 2. The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee In This Appeal Is That Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.20,25,800/- Made By The Assessing Officer Under Section 69A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Treating The

For Appellant: Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Rajkot

In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 874 & 875/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22 ] Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, The Income-Tax Officer, "Radha Swami", 3, Chandan Ward-1(1)(1), Aayakar Vs. Park, Raiya Road, Rajkot, Bhavan, Race Course Ring Gujarat-360007 Road, Rajkot, Gujarat -360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aqhpm2444F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2021-22, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. Since The Issue Involved In These Two Appeals Are Common & Identical, Therefore These Two Appeals Are Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Facts As Well

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs. The Income Tax Officer, Rajkot

In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 874 & 875/Rjt/2026 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2021-22 ] Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, The Income-Tax Officer, "Radha Swami", 3, Chandan Ward-1(1)(1), Aayakar Vs. Park, Raiya Road, Rajkot, Bhavan, Race Course Ring Gujarat-360007 Road, Rajkot, Gujarat -360001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aqhpm2444F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2021-22, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. Since The Issue Involved In These Two Appeals Are Common & Identical, Therefore These Two Appeals Are Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity. The Facts As Well

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs. Income Tax Officer, Morbi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 197/Rjt/2026 [ "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Venish Vinodray Lalani, The Income-Tax Officer, Ward- Prop. Of Nandini Sarees Ghar, 1, Aayakar Vibhag, J. K. Vs. 4, Rup Complex, University Chamber, Lalpar, National Road, Opp. Ramraj Travels, Highway, Morbi – 363642, Rajkot – 360005, Gujarat Gujarat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aflpl9689Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20, Is Directed Against The Order Under Section-250 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nac) Delhi/Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)’], Dated 30.12.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 11.03.2024. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “1. Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre Has Erred In Law & Facts In Dismissing The Grounds Raised In Appeal Venish Vinodray Lalani

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs. CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 658/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 658 & 485/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2022-23 ] Nitinbhai Nanlal Badani, Cit (Appeals), National Vs. Nirav, Gandhi Gram Main Road, Faceless Appeal Centre, Raiya Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Delhi, New Delhi 110001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Achpb0250C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2022-23, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (In Short ‘Ao’) U/S. 147 Of The Act. 2. Since, The Issue Involved In Both These Two Appeals Are Common & Identical Therefore These Two Appeals Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 69A

Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs. CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee (in ITA No

ITA 485/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 658 & 485/Rjt/2025 [ िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21 & 2022-23 ] Nitinbhai Nanlal Badani, Cit (Appeals), National Vs. Nirav, Gandhi Gram Main Road, Faceless Appeal Centre, Raiya Road, Rajkot, Gujarat-360005 Delhi, New Delhi 110001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Achpb0250C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/10/2026 :: Order :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years (Ay) 2020-21 & 2022-23, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [In Short ‘Ld.Cit(A)’] Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (In Short ‘Ao’) U/S. 147 Of The Act. 2. Since, The Issue Involved In Both These Two Appeals Are Common & Identical Therefore These Two Appeals Have Been Clubbed & Heard Together & A Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144B(8)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 250Section 69A

Vikas Ashokkumar Masand, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3130/AHD/2026[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2026

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Shri Tapas Ram Misravikas Ashokkumar Masand, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Indian Oil Petrol Pump, Income Tax, Nr. Manav Mandir, Circle 3(1)(1), Drive-In Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380052. [Pan : Acbpa3190 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant Represented By : Ms Ridhi Masani, Ca On Behalf Of Shri Jaimin Shah, Ar Respondent Represented By: Shri Amit Pratap Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.10.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.10.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:- This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 16.07.2026 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’], Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. That The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi Dated 16.07.2026 Is Bad In Law, Contrary To The Facts On Record, Contrary To The Settled Judicial Precedents & Is Passed Without Properly Appreciating The Evidence & Submissions Placed Before Him & Therefore Requires To Be Set Aside. 2. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 34,40,123/-Made By The Learned Assessing Officer Under Section 69A Of The Act, When The Very

Section 115BSection 131Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68Section 69A