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

Vikasratna Vilasrao Deshmukh Manjara Shetkari Sah Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Latur vs. ITO Ward 1 Nanded, Nanded

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 125/PUN/2026[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.125/Pun/2026 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Vikasratna Vilasrao Deshmukh Manjara Ito, Ward-1, Nanded Shetkari Sah Sakhar Karkhana Limited, Vilas Nagar, Latur-413531 Vs. Pan : Aaaam1527D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Ladda Department By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 30-03-2026 Date Of 06-05-2026 Pronouncement : आदेश / Order Per Astha Chandra, Jm : The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 11.11.2025 Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)/Nfac”] Pertaining To Assessment Year (“Ay”) 2013-14. 2. Briefly Stated The Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society. For Ay 2013-14, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income U/S 139(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) On 30.09.2013 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.28,63,09,080/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened U/S 147 Of The Act Vide Order U/S 148A(D) Of The Act Dated 26.07.2022 On The Ground That “The Assessee Aop Deposited Cash Amounting To Rs.23,31,73,000/- In Its Bank Account. In Absence Of Documentary Evidence The Amount Of Transaction Of Rs.23,31,73,000/- Remain Unexplained & Has Escaped Assessment‖. Thereafter, Notice U/S 148 Of The Act Dated 26.07.2022 Was Issued & Served Upon The Assessee Through Itba Portal. In Response Thereto, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 20.01.2023 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.28,63,09,080/-. Statutory Notice(S) U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Were Accordingly Issued & Served Upon Assessee Through Itba Portal From Time To Time, In Response To Which The Assessee Submitted Its Reply. However, The Show Cause Notice(S) Issued On 17.05.2023 & 21.05.2023 To The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Girish LaddaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A