3. Prakash Narain v. CIT

134 ITR 364High Court#8738 most cited

What is 3. Prakash Narain v. CIT authority for?

The burden of proving that a transaction is benami rests on the person asserting it to be so. Mere suspicion or presumption is insufficient; concrete evidence is required.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Also referred to as

Prakash Narain v. CIT · 134 ITR 364 · benami · benami transaction · burden of proof · onus on revenue · presumption · suspicion · concrete evidence

Judgments citing 3. Prakash Narain v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 288/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. 3. Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) 4. Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue; 5. ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench h…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 287/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. 3. Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) 4. Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue; 5. ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench h…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur vs. Shri Nitin Kedia, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 286/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. 3. Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) 4. Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue; 5. ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench h…

Shri Nirmak Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 126/JPR/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. 3. Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) 4. Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue; 5. ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench h…

Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 125/JPR/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. 3. Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) 4. Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue; 5. ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench h…

Shri Nirmal Kumar Kedia, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 124/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(1)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 19

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. 3. Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) 4. Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue; 5. ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench h…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 583/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…n’ble Allahabad High Court, CIT vs. Smt. Sadhna Devi, Varanasi, Income Tax Reference No. 196 of 1991  Hon’ble Supreme Court, Krishnanand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1977 SC 796  Allahabad High Court, Prakash Narain vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax: 1982 134 ITR 364 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a paper book enclosing therewith the assessment orders passed in the case of Dr. Smt. Kajal Ghosh and submitted that the assets in question and the income thereon, were assessed in the hands of Smt. Kajal Ghosh and argued that the same cannot be assessed once again in the hands of the assessee, as it wo…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 582/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…n’ble Allahabad High Court, CIT vs. Smt. Sadhna Devi, Varanasi, Income Tax Reference No. 196 of 1991  Hon’ble Supreme Court, Krishnanand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1977 SC 796  Allahabad High Court, Prakash Narain vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax: 1982 134 ITR 364 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a paper book enclosing therewith the assessment orders passed in the case of Dr. Smt. Kajal Ghosh and submitted that the assets in question and the income thereon, were assessed in the hands of Smt. Kajal Ghosh and argued that the same cannot be assessed once again in the hands of the assessee, as it wo…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 581/KOL/2016[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…n’ble Allahabad High Court, CIT vs. Smt. Sadhna Devi, Varanasi, Income Tax Reference No. 196 of 1991  Hon’ble Supreme Court, Krishnanand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1977 SC 796  Allahabad High Court, Prakash Narain vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax: 1982 134 ITR 364 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a paper book enclosing therewith the assessment orders passed in the case of Dr. Smt. Kajal Ghosh and submitted that the assets in question and the income thereon, were assessed in the hands of Smt. Kajal Ghosh and argued that the same cannot be assessed once again in the hands of the assessee, as it wo…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 580/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…n’ble Allahabad High Court, CIT vs. Smt. Sadhna Devi, Varanasi, Income Tax Reference No. 196 of 1991  Hon’ble Supreme Court, Krishnanand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1977 SC 796  Allahabad High Court, Prakash Narain vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax: 1982 134 ITR 364 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a paper book enclosing therewith the assessment orders passed in the case of Dr. Smt. Kajal Ghosh and submitted that the assets in question and the income thereon, were assessed in the hands of Smt. Kajal Ghosh and argued that the same cannot be assessed once again in the hands of the assessee, as it wo…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 579/KOL/2016[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…n’ble Allahabad High Court, CIT vs. Smt. Sadhna Devi, Varanasi, Income Tax Reference No. 196 of 1991  Hon’ble Supreme Court, Krishnanand vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1977 SC 796  Allahabad High Court, Prakash Narain vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax: 1982 134 ITR 364 4.1. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a paper book enclosing therewith the assessment orders passed in the case of Dr. Smt. Kajal Ghosh and submitted that the assets in question and the income thereon, were assessed in the hands of Smt. Kajal Ghosh and argued that the same cannot be assessed once again in the hands of the assessee, as it wo…

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Shri Prateek Kothari, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 552/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court.”

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Prithviraj Meena (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 132(4)Section 68

…ra, AIR 1974 SC 171 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is well settled that the burden of proving that a particular sale is Benami and the apparent purchaser is not the real owner, always rests on the person asserting it to be so. c) Prakash Narain Vs CIT 134 ITR 364 (ALL) d) Lal Chand Agarwal vs. ACIT 21 Tax World 213 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench has held that to hold a person as benami of another, one ought to have concrete evidences in contrast to sheer presumptions and suspicion and in such cases initial burden lies on revenue ; e) ITO vs. Shree Ladani Family Trust 21 Tax World 351 Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench…

3. Prakash Narain v. CIT (134 ITR 364) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax