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

Abdul Rahman, Shadora vs. ITO-Ashoknagar, Ashoknagar

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes as indicated upon conclusion of hearing

ITA 372/AGR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.372/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Shri Abdul Rahman Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ Ward-15, Chourasia Garden Ashok Nagar Ke Pass, Main Road, Shadora, Gwalior (Mp) 474001 Vs. Guna-473330. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aphpr-3375-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Miland Wadhwani – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-12 Arises Out Of An Ex-Parte Order Passed By Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 31-07-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act On 24-10-2018. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition U/S 69A For Rs.11.63 Lacs. Though The Assessee Preferred Further Appeal, It Failed To Make Any Representation Therein & Accordingly, The Assessment Was Confirmed Against Which The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Ld. Ar Has Prayed For Another Opportunity Of Hearing Before Lower Authorities Which Has Been Opposed By Ld. Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Miland Wadhwani – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 144Section 69A

M/S Abc Associates, Shivpuri vs. ITO, Ashoknagar

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 118/AGR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 118/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Abc Associates Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 150, Halwai Khana Ashok Nagar (Mp). Vs. Shivpuri (Mp). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajfm-1151-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 12-03-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act On 28-02-2022. In The Assessment Order, Ld. Ao Made Addition Of Rs.428.45 Lacs U/S 69A For Want Of Any Satisfactory Explanation From The Assessee. The Ld. Cit(A) Confirmed The Same For The Same Very Reasons. Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us. The Ld. Ar Stated That The Assessee Is In A Position To Substantiate Its Case & Accordingly, Prayed For Another Opportunity Of Hearing Before Lower Authorities Which Has Which Has Been Opposed By Ld. Sr. Dr.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 69A

Shankar Developers, Gwalior vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Gwalior

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 22/AGR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 22/Agr/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2017-18) Shankar Developers Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ B-117, Samadhiya Colony, Ward 1(3), Gwalior. Harcotataraganj, Lashkar, Vs. Gwalior (Mp). "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Acwfs-8971-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, Ca – Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi [Cit(A)] On 02-12-2022 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] On Best Judgment Basis U/S. 144 Of The Act On 21-12-2019. Having Heard Rival Submission, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under. 2. It Transpired That The Assessee Deposited Cash Of Rs.21.61 Lacs In Its Bank Account During Demonetization Period. In The Absence Of Any Response From Assessee, Ld. Ao Added Total Bank Credit U/S 69A R.W.S. 115Bbe. The Assessee Stated That It Was Engaged As Petty Contractor.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, CA – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. DR
Section 144Section 69A

Baldev Singh Pandher(Deceased) Through L/H Sh. Tanvir Singh, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Ludhiana

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 779/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.779/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Baldev Singh Pandher (Deceased) Ito, Ward 3(1), बनाम/ Through L/H Sh. Tanvir Singh Ludhiana. Po Sangowal, Village Rania Via Jaspal Vs. Banger, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Chapp-4840-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax [Cit(A)] Dated 15-05-2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] U/S. 143(3) Of The Act On 21-11-2019. The Deceased Assessee Is Represented By His Legal Heir Shri Tanvir Singh Who Has Filed Paper-Book Supporting The Case Of The Deceased Assessee. However, At Time Of Hearing, None Appeared For Assessee. Left With No Option, The Appeal Is Disposed-Off As Under.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 69A