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 367,154 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

M/S Bihari Lal Malpani, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 43(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 527/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby. T. Varkey & Shri M. Balaganeshi.T.A. No.527/Kol/2017 (Assessment Year 2013-14) M/S Bihari Lal Malpani Ito, Ward-43(1), Kolkata. -Vs- [Pan :Adupm 6438 R]

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…o interfere," It is settled law that, no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of C.I.T. (Central) Calcutta vs. DaulatRarn Rawatmull (87 ITR 349) wherein it had held that "The onus to prove that the apparent is not the real is on the party who claims it to be so.” The Assessing Officer made various other allegations like price rigging etc. without bringing on record any cogent material and corroborative evidences. There is nothing on record to suggest that the prices were rigged by the Ass…

Shambhu Kumar Agarwal, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1382/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (C.A) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 131Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 251(2)Section 68Section 69A

…charged by strict legal proof and not on conjectures and surmises. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Bedi & Co. Pvt. Ld. 230 ITR 580 as well as in case of CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull 87 ITR 349. The assessee has proved the real nature of the entry recorded in the seized paper. Since it has been duly proved beyond any doubt with documentary evidence, therefore the test of human probability is not applicable in the case of the assessee as it is a case of misconceived interpretation by the AO and ld. CIT(A) without any nexus with the fact…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota vs. M/S Rajasthan Cable Industries Limited, Kota

ITA 1189/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…a further onus of establishing the source from which such third party had been able to obtain the money. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: - (i) Sideways Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 24 Tax World 146 (JP ITAT) (ii) CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmal 87 ITR 349 (SC) (iii) Saraogi Credit Corp. Vs. CIT 103 ITR 344 (PAT) iii) Genuineness a) The assessee submitted the confirmation of lender (PB pg 444/Vol-II/A.Y 2015-16 and PB Pg 444-446/Vol-II/A.Y 2016-17). b) The assessee has submitted the affidavit of the director of the cash credit company (PB pg 446-449/Vol –II/ A.Y 2015-16 and PB Pg 451-454/Vol-II/A…

M/S Rajasthan Cable Industries Limited, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1121/JPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…a further onus of establishing the source from which such third party had been able to obtain the money. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: - (i) Sideways Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 24 Tax World 146 (JP ITAT) (ii) CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmal 87 ITR 349 (SC) (iii) Saraogi Credit Corp. Vs. CIT 103 ITR 344 (PAT) iii) Genuineness a) The assessee submitted the confirmation of lender (PB pg 444/Vol-II/A.Y 2015-16 and PB Pg 444-446/Vol-II/A.Y 2016-17). b) The assessee has submitted the affidavit of the director of the cash credit company (PB pg 446-449/Vol –II/ A.Y 2015-16 and PB Pg 451-454/Vol-II/A…

M/S Rajasthan Cable Industries Limited, Kota vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kota

ITA 1052/JPR/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Mar 2019AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…a further onus of establishing the source from which such third party had been able to obtain the money. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: - (i) Sideways Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 24 Tax World 146 (JP ITAT) (ii) CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmal 87 ITR 349 (SC) (iii) Saraogi Credit Corp. Vs. CIT 103 ITR 344 (PAT) iii) Genuineness a) The assessee submitted the confirmation of lender (PB pg 444/Vol-II/A.Y 2015-16 and PB Pg 444-446/Vol-II/A.Y 2016-17). b) The assessee has submitted the affidavit of the director of the cash credit company (PB pg 446-449/Vol –II/ A.Y 2015-16 and PB Pg 451-454/Vol-II/A…

Asst CIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Chhaya Gems, Mumbai

ITA 2552/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan (AR)For Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikiyen (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147

…tax gatherer and his perhaps not so successful advisors on the other side. 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). It is also a settled legal proposition that if no evidence is given by the party on whom the burden is cast, the issue must be found against him. In the instant case, the appellant has miserably failed to lead the evidence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Chuharmal v. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 / 38 Taxm…

Late Smt. Mohini Puri Through, Jammu vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 76/ASR/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 76/Asr/2013 Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 149

…rused the material on record. The first thing that strikes one is that the assessee’s case is, without doubt, wholly unevidenced. The adjudication by the Tribunal has necessarily to be on the basis of the material on record (CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC); CIT v. Radha Kishan Nandlal [1975] 99 ITR 143 (SC)). There is no document to show that the shop was sold, much less during the relevant year, or in May, 2003, as stated. There is nothing to show that the shop in fact belonged to the assessee’s late son. The subject property is not identified nor indeed the person/s buying the same, or even p…

Shri Om Prakash Singh, Mathura vs. ACIT Circle-3, Agra

In the result appeal is partly allowed

ITA 331/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 144Section 234BSection 44ASection 68

…gid vs. ACIT (2008) 217 CTR (Raj.) 354 (d) CIT Vs Diamond Products Limited (2009) 177 Taxman 331 (Del) (e) Sargoi Credit Corporation vs. CIT (1976) 103 ITR 344 (Pat.) (f) MeghajiNarain& Co. vs. ITO (1990) 37 TTJ (Ind.) 624 (g) CIT vs. DaulatramRawatmal (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC) (h) Kishan Chand Chelaram vs. CIT (1980) 125 ITR 713 (S.C.) (i) CIT Vs. RanchhodJivabhaiNakhava in Appeal No. 50 of 2011 (Guj. H.C) (j) CIT Vs. M/s. Dataware (P) Limited in ITAT No. 263 of 2011 GA No. 2856 of 2011 (Calcutta High Court) (k) MunnalalMurliDharVs CIT (1971) 79 ITR 540 (All.) 11 I.T.A No. 331/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12)…

M/S Sant Baba Bhag Singh Memorial Charitable Society, Jalandhar vs. D.C.I.T, Circle - 1 (Exemption), Chandigarh

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 432/ASR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar27 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 432/(Asr)/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

…ed the donation, is not the actual donor, is on the Revenue. The apparent is even otherwise real unless shown to be otherwise, the onus of which is on the person who claims so (CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1977] 82 ITR 540 (SC); CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmal [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC)). Identity, in the context of a receipt, given that the concept of income under the Act is wide enough to include anything that comes in, with the receipt itself being an evidence of the recipient being in receipt of income, is inextricably linked to capacity in-as-much the two together constitute the ‘source’, implying an identifiable source…

Shri Ashish Tandon, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 1954/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 45Section 54FSection 55

…dgments of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Deepak Nitrate Limited Vs CIT [(2008) 175 Taxman 130 (Guj)], Sreelekha Banerjee Vs CIT [(1963) 49 ITR 112 (SC)], Udhavedas Kevalram Vs CIT [(1967) 66 ITR 462 (SC)], CIT Vs Daulatram Rawalmull [(19730 87 ITR 349 (SC)], CIT Vs Orrissa Corporation Pvt Ltd [(1986) 159 ITR 78 (SC)], Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT [(1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC)]. Learned counsel then pointed out that the genuineness of the above agreement is also accepted, by implication, by Dhanya Thakkar who invested in 30% shareholdings after this agreement, by Venkatesh Sunder, an employee w…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Skyway Constructon Co., Mumbai

ITA 5865/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 145(3)

…o refuse to give judicial benediction. ITA. No. 5865/M/2017 A.Y.2009-10 6.8 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, WD-5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1179/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2008-09 Income Tax Officer, V/S. M/S Purbasa Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 5/5 Clive Row, 4Th Ward-5(2), P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Room No.26, 8Th Floor, Room No.6, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaecp 1267B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 15-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2008-09 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata’S Order Dated 29.06.2015, Passed In Case No.1575/Cit(A)-2/2015-16, In Proceedings U/S. 144 R.W.S 263 R.W.S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Seeks To Revere The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Unexplained Cash Credits Addition Of ₹3.14 Lac Made In The Course Of Assessment Framed On 19.03.2015. The Assessee’S Case Before Assessing Officer Was That This Sum Represented Its Share Application / Premium Raised During The Course Of Relevant Previous Year. The Assessing Officer Held In The Course Of Assessment That Assessee Had Failed To Prove Identity, Genuineness & Creditworthiness Of The Investors

Section 144Section 68

…ons which have taken place between the assessee and the creditor. It is not the business of assessee to find out the source of money of creditors. Similar observation has also been given in the case of Hastimal 49 ITR 273 (Madr) and Daulatram Rawatrnal (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC). Ld. First Appellate Authority has cited various decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the impugned order and finally has held that the assessee has substantiated the transaction regarding share application money received by it was genuine transaction and the same were not…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Happy Home Corporation, Surat

ITA 715/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…s are produced) creditworthiness (return of income / balance sheet/source of source filed) of the parties, AO cannot treat the unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits. This contention is supported by the following decisions :- • CIT Vs. Daulatram Ravatmal 87 ITR 349 (S.C) ITA No.1991/Ahd/2016 and 715/Ahd/2017 21 • Dhirajlal Girdharlal Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) • Murlidhar Lahorimal Vs. CIT 280 ITR 512 (Guj) • CIT Vs. Pragati Co-operative Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170 [Guj) (c) Even 'source of the source' has been explained: It is settled law that addition u/s. 68 of the Act cannot be made if source of source is…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Happy Home Corporation, Surat

ITA 1991/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…s are produced) creditworthiness (return of income / balance sheet/source of source filed) of the parties, AO cannot treat the unsecured loans as unexplained cash credits. This contention is supported by the following decisions :- • CIT Vs. Daulatram Ravatmal 87 ITR 349 (S.C) ITA No.1991/Ahd/2016 and 715/Ahd/2017 21 • Dhirajlal Girdharlal Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC) • Murlidhar Lahorimal Vs. CIT 280 ITR 512 (Guj) • CIT Vs. Pragati Co-operative Bank Ltd. 278 ITR 170 [Guj) (c) Even 'source of the source' has been explained: It is settled law that addition u/s. 68 of the Act cannot be made if source of source is…

Bhopal Singh Shekhawat, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 656/JPR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 244ASection 251Section 45Section 48(2)

…a settled law that what is apparent is real unless controverted. The onus lay upon the person, who alleges that what is apparent is not real. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT (Central) v/s Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), followed in CIT v/s Bedi & Co. Pvt. Ltd. (1998) 230 ITR 580 (SC). In the instant case under consideration, the appellant has failed ITA 656/JP/2016_ 18 Bhopal Singh Shekhawat Vs ITO to brought on record any material which may lead to the conclusion that the apparent is not real. The alleged family settlement as stated earlier is only a sel…

Goverdhan Sigh Shekhawat, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 517/JPR/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2019AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varindar Mehta (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 244ASection 54F

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 517/JP/2013 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 cuke Shri Goverdhan Singh Shekhawat, The ITO, Vs. Plot No. 19, Opp. Sector-8, Ward-6(1), Jai Shree Nagar, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ASBPS2383M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) jktLo…

Sri Subrata Banerjee, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 51(1), Kolkata

ITA 2275/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…n'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salav Mohamed Sait reported in (1959) 37 ITR 151 (S C) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT(Central), Kolkata vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull reported in 87 ITR 349, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not the 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 raising an…

ITO, Ward - 4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tribute Trading and Finance Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1496/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…n'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salav Mohamed Sait reported in (1959) 37 ITR 151 (S C) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT(Central), Kolkata vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull reported in 87 ITR 349, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not the 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 raising an…

ITO, Ward - 4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tribute Trading and Finance Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1495/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganesh

Section 143(3)Section 69C

…n'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salav Mohamed Sait reported in (1959) 37 ITR 151 (S C) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT(Central), Kolkata vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull reported in 87 ITR 349, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not the 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 raising an…

ITO, Ward - 40(2), Kolkata vs. Shri Suresh Chand Gupta, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1730/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Dec 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2014-15 Ito Ward-40(2) V/S. Shri Suresh Chand Gupta 2Nd Floor, 3 16, Tara Chand Dutta Government Place Street, Kolkata-700073 West,Kolkata-700001 [Pan No.Aczpg 0724 C] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ajoy Kr. Singh, Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manish Tiwari, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-11-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 26-12-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Revenue’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Kolkata’S Order Dated 20.04.2017, Passed In Case No.10190/Cit(A)-12/Kol/Ward-40(2)/2016-17, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S Sole Substantive Ground Raised In The Instant Appeal Pleads That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Reversing The Assessing Officer’S Action Treating Assessee’S Alleged Long Term Capital Gains (Ltcg) Of ₹3,84,74,960/- To Be Bogus In The Nature Of Unexplained Cash Credits U/S 68 Of The Act. The Cit(A)’S Detailed Discussion Qua The Impugned Sole Issue Reads As Under:- “3.2 I Have Perused The Observations & Findings Contained In The Assessment Order. I Have Also Considered The Submission Of The Appellant Along With Paper Book Filed By Ld. A/R Which Contained, Inter-Alia, The Following Documents:-

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…n'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salav Mohamed Sait reported in (1959) 37 ITR 151 (S C) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT(Central), Kolkata vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull reported in 87 ITR 349, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that, the onus to prove that the apparent is not the 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 raising an…