Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2014 (7) TMI 10 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        High Court rules undisclosed salary income subject to tax even with TDS The High Court held in favor of the revenue and against the assessee in a tax case involving undisclosed income from salary. The Court ruled that salary ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            High Court rules undisclosed salary income subject to tax even with TDS

                            The High Court held in favor of the revenue and against the assessee in a tax case involving undisclosed income from salary. The Court ruled that salary income declared in the return of undisclosed income should be treated as undisclosed income for tax purposes, even if TDS was deducted. Additionally, salary income disclosed during block assessment proceedings was not excluded from undisclosed income, as the mere deduction of TDS does not constitute disclosure. The Court also reinstated the original addition of unexplained investment, emphasizing the obligation to file returns to disclose income.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Whether the salary income declared in the return of undisclosed income can be treated as undisclosed income for levying tax at 60%.
                            2. Whether the salary income disclosed by the assessee in the return of the block period should be excluded.
                            3. Whether the reduction of the addition on account of unexplained investment from Rs. 1,88,884/- to Rs. 35,000/- by the Tribunal was justified.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            Issue 1: Treatment of Salary Income as Undisclosed Income
                            The core issue was whether the salary income declared by the assessee in the return of undisclosed income could be treated as undisclosed income for the purpose of levying tax at 60%, despite the provisions of Section 158BB(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal had initially ruled that since TDS was deducted on the salary income, it could not be treated as undisclosed income. However, the Court referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of A.R. Enterprises, which clarified that mere deduction of tax at source does not amount to disclosure of income. It was emphasized that the obligation to file a return remains even if TDS is deducted, and failure to file such returns means the income remains undisclosed. Consequently, the Court concluded that the Tribunal erred in its decision and held that the salary income should indeed be treated as undisclosed income.

                            Issue 2: Exclusion of Salary Income in the Return of Block Period
                            The Tribunal had excluded the salary income disclosed by the assessee in the return of the block period from being treated as undisclosed income. The Court reiterated the principles laid out in the A.R. Enterprises case, emphasizing that the mere deduction of TDS does not equate to the disclosure of income. The Court noted that the assessee filed the return of income only after the initiation of block assessment proceedings, indicating an absence of intention to disclose the income. Therefore, the Tribunal's decision to exclude the salary income was incorrect, and the income should be treated as undisclosed.

                            Issue 3: Reduction of Addition on Account of Unexplained Investment
                            The Tribunal had reduced the addition on account of unexplained investment from Rs. 1,88,884/- to Rs. 35,000/-. The Court found that there was no evidence or specific reasons provided by the Tribunal for this reduction. It was noted that the unexplained investment was found during the search, and the assessee did not file a return of income declaring this investment until after the block assessment proceedings were initiated. The Court, referencing the A.R. Enterprises decision, inferred that the intention of the assessee was not to disclose the income. Thus, the Tribunal's reduction of the addition was deemed erroneous, and the original addition by the Assessing Officer was restored.

                            Conclusion:
                            The High Court quashed and set aside the Tribunal's judgment and restored the order passed by the Assessing Officer, confirming the CIT(A)'s decision. The Court held all the questions in favor of the revenue and against the assessee, emphasizing the importance of filing returns to disclose income and the insufficiency of TDS deduction alone as a disclosure of income.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found