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

Anu Gupta, Rohini, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle 34(1), Civic Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3106/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.3106/िद"ी/2025 (िन.व. 2017-18) Anu Gupta, 62 A, Naharpur, Sector-7, Rohini, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 110085 Pan: Auupg-3868-N बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle 34(1), Civic Centre, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : None "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 27/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 18.11.2024, For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 98 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Application Citing Reasons Causing Delay In Filing Of Appeal. After Perusal Of The Same, I Am Satisfied That Delay In Filing Of Appeal Is Not Intentional, The Delay Has Been Caused For The Reasons Stated In Petition Which Appears To Be Bonafide. Thus, Delay Of 98 Days In Filing Of Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Decision On Merits.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 69A

Deepak Communication, Ajit Nagar vs. Assessing Officer, Delhi

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

ITA 3076/DEL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.3076/िद"ी/2025 (िन.व. 2017-18) Deepak Communication, Gali No.4, Ajit Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Delhi 110031 Pan: Aamfd-3905-A बनाम Vs. Assessing Officer, Ward-60(6), ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : None "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 27/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against An Ex-Parte Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08.09.2023, For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Solitary Issue, In The Present Appeal By The Assessee Is Against Levy Of Penalty U/S.271Aac(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Amounting To Rs.1,04,674/-. The Assesssee Had Deposited Cash Amounting To Rs.13,55,000/- During Demonetization Period I.E. Between 09.11.2016 To 30.12.2016 In His Bank Account Maintained With Yes Bank Ltd. Krishna Nagar Delhi, Account No. 226190000295. The Return Of Income Was Filed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271ASection 274Section 69A

Hemant Naresh Agarwal, Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cir. 4, Surat

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 170/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआ.(खो और ज).सं /It(Ss)A No.68 & 70/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2018-19 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Hemant Naresh Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Vs. Surat Room No.508, 5Th Floor, Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Surat-395 010 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.170/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hemant Naresh Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Surat-395 010 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292CSection 69

Subramanian, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1823/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1823/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Subramanian, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 78, Co-Operative Colony, Vilankurichi, Ward 1(4), Coimbatore 641 035. Erode. [Pan:Cerps9236R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate (Virtual) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Samatha M. Mullamudi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.05.2025 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made Under Section 69A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] By The Assessing Officer.

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Samatha M. Mullamudi, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Anjali Jain, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 53(1), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3239/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.3239/िद"ी/2025 (िन.व. 2017-18) Anjali Jain, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant R-25, Ndse-Ii, New Delhi 110049 Pan: Aaipj-2323-D बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-53(1) ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Civic Centre, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : S/Shri Sanchit Jain, Chartered Accountant & Archit Agarwal, "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 24/10/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 11.04.2025, For Assessment Year 2017-18.] 2. Shri Sanchit Jain, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Submitted That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Gold, Diamond & Precious Stone Jewelry. For The Impugned Assessment Year, The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income On 31.10.2017 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.4,99,260/-. The Case Of The Assessee For Ay 2017-18 Was Reopened & Notice U/S. 148 Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated

For Appellant: S/Shri Sanchit Jain, Chartered Accountant &For Respondent: Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 151Section 69A