CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull

87 ITR 349Supreme Court of India1973#124 most cited

What is CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull authority for?

The onus to prove that an apparent transaction or explanation is not real lies with the person who claims it to be so. If an assessee provides a plausible explanation for a transaction, the revenue must establish that the apparent transaction is not genuine.

525

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull · 87 ITR 349 · Section 68 · Section 69A · onus of proof · burden of proof · apparent is not real · genuineness of transaction · cash credit · unexplained money · suspicion not evidence · sufficiency of evidence

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 132Section 132(4)Section 148Section 69CSection 133(6)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

retraction of statementdumb documentscreditworthiness of the creditorbogus long term capital gainsection 132(4a)section 292csection 132(4)loose papersaddition under section 68section 10(38)section 127on-money

Judgments citing CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull

ITO 14(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Nextgen Constructions P.Tld (Changed to M/S Aetius Construction P. Ltd Which Is Further Amalgamated With M/S Supergold Properties Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 3593/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Dr.P.Daniel-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman-CIT- DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…1 Nextgen Construction Private Limited Assessment Year :2011-12 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3593/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Income Tax Officer-14(3)(4) Nextgen Construction Pvt. Ltd. Room No.482(1), 4th Floor (Changed to M/s.Aetius Construction Pvt.Ltd. which is further amalgamated with M/s. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road बनाम/ Supergold Properties…

Reliance Forge (India), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 19(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6661/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Satishchandra Rajore
Section 143(3)

…tances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents. 8.3.3 The onus to prove that apparent, is not the real one, is on the party who claims it to be so, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 and CIT v. Durga Prasad More (supra). In the latter case, it has been held by the Apex Court that though an apparent statement must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that apparent was not the real, in a case where an authority relied on self serving recitals in documents, it was for the party to establish the…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 6168/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Kuldip Singhdr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6168/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, Vs Sh. Sunil Nayyar, Ward-49(3), R/O 81-A, Vikrant Enclave, New Delhi Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Abvpn3963B

For Appellant: Sh. Jagdish Ajmani, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 68

…to compute the income either u/s 144(1) or sec. 145(3) the computation and determination of income cannot be at the whims and fancies of A.O. There must be in existence relevant material or evidence, for making estimation of income. CIT Vs Daulat Ram Rawatmul 87 ITR 349 (S.C). However, the A.O. has not placed on records any material or evidence or the basis of his estimation. In fact, A.O. has not given even a single reason for estimating the income and for making such a huge addition. ITA No. 6168/Del/2016 & 18 CO No. 9/Del/2017 Sunil Nayyar V. CONFRONTING THE BASIS OF ESTIMATION TO THE ASSESSEE The section c…

Sh. Barat Pal Sood, Phagwara vs. The Income Tax Officer, Phagwara

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 11/ASR/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Feb 2020AY 2009-2010
For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Vijh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(3)

…e ld. CIT(A) 8 was not justified in disbelieving the amounts received by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated the submission made before him that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull reported at 87 ITR 349, 350 where in it was held that "From the simple fact that the explanation regarding the source of money furnished by X, in whose name the money was lying in deposit, had been found to be false, it would be remote and far-fetched conclusion to hold that the money belonged to Y." Thus even if there was some doubt about the source of funds in the ban…

Income Tax Officer-23(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Indian Corporate Loan Securities Trust 2008 Series 14, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

ITA 4789/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 148Section 161Section 161(1)Section 61

…e alleged AOP, the question of their constituting an AOP does not arise. (vi) It was submitted that the burden is on the Revenue to show that the assessee constitute an AOP, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull[1973] 87 ITR 349; which burden the Revenue has not been discharged. An AOP is not an entity which is authorized to do a securitization activity and hence to hold the assessee as AOP would amount to negating the action of the assessee. Only a juristic person can become a member of an AOP and Mutual Funds being trusts, i.e. a 'non-juristic person' cannot become a me…

ITO, Ward - 2(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Height Insurance Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2163/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jan 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2163/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri Radhey Shyam, CITFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCA
Section 133Section 143(3)

…for ready reference. These M/s Height Insurance Services Ltd. Assessment Year:2009-10 were placed on Page Nos. 243 to 245 of the Paper Book attached with his written submissions. It was as early as in 1973 that the Apex Court, in Daulat Ram Rawat Mull (1973) 87 ITR 349, laid down the law for the onus when any party to a dispute disagreed with whatever was shown as apparent. The Supreme Court held that the onus of proving what was apparent was not real lay with the party that claimed it to be so. There should be some direct nexus between the conclusions of fact arrived at by the authorities concerned and the prim…

Yogesh Amrutlal Doshi, Thane vs. ITO 2 (4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

ITA 6651/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No6651/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिधम/ Yogeshamrutlaldoshi Ito-2(4) R. No.22, B Wing, 6Th Floor, Bldg. No.B-3, Flat No. 201, Vs. Poonam Nagar, Phase-Iii, Rd. No.16Z, Ashar It Park Opp. Shanti Nagar, Mira Thane(W), 400604. Road (E), Thane-421104. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Agspd2681C (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. Assessee By: Shrinimeshchothani Revenue By: Shri V. Vinod Kumar (Sr. Ar)

For Appellant: ShriNimeshChothaniFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar (Sr. AR)
Section 133(6)Section 145Section 147Section 40A(3)Section 44A

…mstances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents. 7.7. The onus to prove that apparent, is not the real one, is on the party who claims it to be so, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 and CIT v. Durga Prasad More (supra). In the latter case, it has been held by the Apex Court that though an apparent statement must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that apparent was not the real, in a case where an authority relied on self -serving recitals in documents, it was for the party to establish th…

M/S. Sardhana Papers (P) Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. ACIT, Meerut

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4110/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR
Section 133(6)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sardhana Papers (P) Ltd., Vs ACIT, Opp. Power Station, Circle-2, Meerut Road, Sardhana, Meerut. Uttar Pradesh. PAN: AABCS9548K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate & Shri Raj Kumar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri S.S. Rana, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 05.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27th June, 2016 of the CIT(A),…

Income Tax Officer-9(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Manish P. Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2397/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodito-19(2)(3) Vs. Manish P.Shah 2Nd Room No.218, Floor, C/O M/S. Microlink Matru Mandir Technologies, Office No.3, 3Rd 14Th Tardeo Road Floor, Mehta Mumbai-400 007 Mansion, Tribuvan Road, Off. Lamington Road Mumbai-400 004 Pan/Gir No.Aaeps4599J (Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…umstances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents. 7.6 The onus to prove that apparent, is not the real one, is on the party who claims it to be so, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Dautat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 and CIT v. Durga Prasad More supra). In the latter case, it has been held by the Apex Court that though an apparent statement must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that apparent was not the real in a case where an authority relied on self serving recitals in documents, it was for the party to establish the p…

Shree Bhavani Developer, Mumbai vs. ITO 21 (3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals for A

ITA 1850/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Kumar Parida, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Nitin Waghmode, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…al loan activities carried out during the year and the said loan is already repaid in the year 2013-14. In this regard, a copy of the ledger account and bank statement was filed by the assessee before the AO. In the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that once the assessee is able to establish that he has in fact received money from a third party, he cannot be burdened with a further onus of establishing the source from which such third party had been able to obtain the money. It is well-settled that when an assessee claims that he had borrowed mo…

Shree Bhavani Developer, Mumbai vs. ITO 21 (3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals for A

ITA 1849/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Kumar Parida, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Nitin Waghmode, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…al loan activities carried out during the year and the said loan is already repaid in the year 2013-14. In this regard, a copy of the ledger account and bank statement was filed by the assessee before the AO. In the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that once the assessee is able to establish that he has in fact received money from a third party, he cannot be burdened with a further onus of establishing the source from which such third party had been able to obtain the money. It is well-settled that when an assessee claims that he had borrowed mo…

Shree Bhavani Developer, Mumbai vs. ITO 21 (3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals for A

ITA 1848/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Kumar Parida, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Nitin Waghmode, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 148Section 68

…al loan activities carried out during the year and the said loan is already repaid in the year 2013-14. In this regard, a copy of the ledger account and bank statement was filed by the assessee before the AO. In the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), it is held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that once the assessee is able to establish that he has in fact received money from a third party, he cannot be burdened with a further onus of establishing the source from which such third party had been able to obtain the money. It is well-settled that when an assessee claims that he had borrowed mo…

ITO - 19(3)(3), Mumbai vs. Shripal G. Jain, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3011/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 19(3)(3) V. Shri Shripal G. Jain Room No. 219, 2Nd Floor 88-92, 1St Pathan Street Matru Mandir, Tardev Road Mumbai – 400 004 Mumbai – 400 007 Pan: Adlpj8781H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Chamaria Department By : Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh ChamariaFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 69C

…; reality of the recitals made in those documents. 5 Shri Shripal G. Jain 8.7 The onus to prove that apparent, is not the real one, is on the party who claims it to be so, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 and CIT.v. Durga Prasad More (supra). In the latter case, it has been held by the Apex Court that though' an apparent statement must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that apparent was not the real, in a case where an authority relied on self serving recitals in documents, it was for the party to establish th…

R.D.Kasiviswanathan, Madurai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 2, Madurai

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

ITA 1538/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 102Section 131

…osed to the law as applicable to such facts. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,32,355/- towards ‘unexplained money’. 2.1. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to apply the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull 87 ITR 349 (SC); Kishan Chand Chellaram v. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) and CIT v. Shivakami Co. P. Ltd. 159 ITR 71 (SC). 2.2. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to note that as per sec. 102, 103 and 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the burden of proof was on the transferor. 2.3. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to consider the decisions in CIT V. Paramjit Singh v. ITO 323 ITR 588 (…

Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 8 (1), Mumbai

ITA 3429/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3429/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3428/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3427/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal A-403, Meghdoot Apt., Raheja Township, ……………. Appellant Malad East, Mumbai-400 097 / अपीलाथी स्थायी लेखा िं /Pan – Akapm9809R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-8(1), 6Th Floor, Room No. 679 / प्रत्यथााी Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3311/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3312/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3313/Mum/2019

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 71 | P a g e 3427-3429/Mum/2019, 3311-3313/Mum/2019, 3426/Mum/2019, 3264&3265/Mum/2019, 3247&3248/Mum/2019 Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to be so. The burden of proving a transaction to be bogus has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raisin…

Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 8 (1), Mumbai

ITA 3428/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3429/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3428/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3427/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal A-403, Meghdoot Apt., Raheja Township, ……………. Appellant Malad East, Mumbai-400 097 / अपीलाथी स्थायी लेखा िं /Pan – Akapm9809R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-8(1), 6Th Floor, Room No. 679 / प्रत्यथााी Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3311/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3312/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3313/Mum/2019

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 71 | P a g e 3427-3429/Mum/2019, 3311-3313/Mum/2019, 3426/Mum/2019, 3264&3265/Mum/2019, 3247&3248/Mum/2019 Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to be so. The burden of proving a transaction to be bogus has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raisin…

Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 8 (1), Mumbai

ITA 3427/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3429/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3428/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3427/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal A-403, Meghdoot Apt., Raheja Township, ……………. Appellant Malad East, Mumbai-400 097 / अपीलाथी स्थायी लेखा िं /Pan – Akapm9809R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-8(1), 6Th Floor, Room No. 679 / प्रत्यथााी Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3311/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3312/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3313/Mum/2019

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 71 | P a g e 3427-3429/Mum/2019, 3311-3313/Mum/2019, 3426/Mum/2019, 3264&3265/Mum/2019, 3247&3248/Mum/2019 Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to be so. The burden of proving a transaction to be bogus has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raisin…

Shri. Mahendra B Mittal HUF, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle-8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3426/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3429/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3428/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3427/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal A-403, Meghdoot Apt., Raheja Township, ……………. Appellant Malad East, Mumbai-400 097 / अपीलाथी स्थायी लेखा िं /Pan – Akapm9809R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-8(1), 6Th Floor, Room No. 679 / प्रत्यथााी Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3311/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3312/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3313/Mum/2019

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 71 | P a g e 3427-3429/Mum/2019, 3311-3313/Mum/2019, 3426/Mum/2019, 3264&3265/Mum/2019, 3247&3248/Mum/2019 Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to be so. The burden of proving a transaction to be bogus has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raisin…

Pooja Mahendra Mittal, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC - 8(1), Mumbai

ITA 3314/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Oct 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3429/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3428/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3427/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2014-15) Shri Vijayrattan Balkrishan Mittal A-403, Meghdoot Apt., Raheja Township, ……………. Appellant Malad East, Mumbai-400 097 / अपीलाथी स्थायी लेखा िं /Pan – Akapm9809R V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Circle-8(1), 6Th Floor, Room No. 679 / प्रत्यथााी Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3311/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3312/Mum/2019 (यिर्ाारण बर्ा / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील िं/ Ita No. 3313/Mum/2019

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 71 | P a g e 3427-3429/Mum/2019, 3311-3313/Mum/2019, 3426/Mum/2019, 3264&3265/Mum/2019, 3247&3248/Mum/2019 Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to be so. The burden of proving a transaction to be bogus has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidences, which would directly prove the fact of bogusness or establish circumstance unerringly and reasonably raisin…

Verma Service Station, Firozabad vs. ACIT, Firozabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 212/AGR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 68

…. 212/Agra/2018 11 CIT(A). He has urged to delete the addition. The counsel of the assessee has placed reliance on the Plethora of Judgment as follows: 1. CIT vs. Noorjahan, 237 ITR 570 (SC) 2. CIT vs. Orissa Corporation 159 ITR 78 (SC) 3. CIT vs. Daulatram 87 ITR 349 (SC) 4. CIT vs. V.S. Kamaljeet Singh 147 Taxman 18 (All.). 5. CIT vs. Johrimal Goyal 147 Taxman 448 (Alld). 6. Dwarikadhish Sugar Industries vs. ITO, in ITA No. 115/Lkw/2011, dated 24.05.2012. ITAT, Lucknow. (TM) 7. CIT vs. Jaiswal Motor Finance 141 ITR 706 (All. High Court). 8. Shri Avtar Singh Darshan Singh vs. ACIT in ITA No. 455/Agra/2011, Dat…