How many judgments cite CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull?

525 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (87 ITR 349), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 153A, Section 132, Section 132(4), Section 148.

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 366,470 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 68 Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 132 Section 132(4)Section 148 Section 69C Section 133(6)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

retraction of statement dumb documents creditworthiness of the creditor bogus long term capital gain section 132(4a)section 292c section 132(4)loose papers addition under section 68 section 10(38)section 127 on-money

Judgments citing CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull

Samkit Diamonds Exporters, Mumbai vs. ACIT 19(3), Mumbai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee as well of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4133/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4133/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Samkit Diamonds Exporters Acit 19(3) 111 Prasad Chambers, Tata Mumbai Road No.2, Opera House, V. Mumbai 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aakfs5302F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Sanjay K ParikhFor Respondent: Shri. V. Vidyadhar,Sr DR

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “H” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.4133/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ Samkit Diamonds Exporters ACIT 19(3) 111 Prasad Chambers, Tata Mumbai Road No.2, Opera House, v. Mumbai 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAKFS5302F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 4383/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बिाम/ ACIT 19(3),Matru Mandir, Samkit Diamonds 2n d floor, R.No. 206, Tardeo…

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

…d been able to obtain the money. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: - 13 Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur Vs Shri Prateek Kothari, Jaipur (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) (g) The assessee relies on the following decisions:- (i) CIT Vs Orissa Corporation (P) Ltd (1986) 159 ITR 79 (SC) The assessee had given named and addresses of the cash creditors, who were income tax assessees. Revenue apart from issuing summon u/s 131 notices to creditors, did not pursue…

Eastern Sales Agencies, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 22, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 2186/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2186/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Mrs. Chitra Agarwal, Asst. Cit-16(1), बनाम/ C/O. Laxmi Ventures India Ltd. Mumbai 36/40, Mahalaxmi Bridge Arcade, Vs. Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400 034 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaipa 3251 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Haridas Bhat ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhatFor Respondent: Ms. Hemalatha

Section 143Section 147Section 69C

…discharge the burden, that lay on a party, is produced, by that party. 2.4.21 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 [1971] 82 ITR 540. In the case of Durga Prasad More (supra), 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 w…

P. B. Enterprise, Kolkata vs. ACIT Circle 37, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 719/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 719/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 250Section 40

…ssessee only on suspicion and relied on the following case laws for the propositions that suspicion, however, strong cannot take the place of proof.  ITA No. 270 of 1999, CIT vs. Lakshmangarh Estate & Trading Co. Ltd.  CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Mull, (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC) 4.1.2. He prayed that the disallowance be deleted and in the alternative, the issue be restored to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law. He pleaded that this being a very old matter and the assessee being a small businessman and the fact that numerous rounds of 5 I.T.A. No. 719/Kol/2017 Assessmen…

Mandakini Hospitality P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2538/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar

Section 10(38)

…or any of its associate concern have made payment to the purchaser before the assessee received the sale consideration from the purchaser. This is settled law in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT versus Daulat Ram Rawat Mull 87 ITR 349 that apparent is real the onus is on the part who alleges apparent is not real. We find that the Revenue has not brought out any cogent material or evidence on record which may prove that the transaction entered into by the assessee for the sale of shares is non genuine. It is a case where the assessee held the shares for more than five years and…

Indira Vasanji Shah( Since Deceased Through Legal Representative Shahank Liladhar), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 18(2), Mumbai

ITA 8805/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri N.M. PorwalFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar

Section 133(6)Section 2(14)Section 50C

…he Revenue to prove that the document furnished by the assessee is a fabricated one. We reverse the said finding in the absence of any evidence. It is the settled view as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Daulatram Rawatmall 87 ITR 349 that the onus to prove that the apparent is not the real is on the party who alleges that the apparent is not real. Merely an agreement has not been entered into by the assessee with the Developer within a period of six months from the date of allotment did not mean that a right of the assessee has not been created in the flat to be constructed by…

ITO 3(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Harsh Dalmia, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7459/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

Section 68

…tances available on record. The opinion of the AD is required to be formed objectively with reference to the 4 Shri Harsh Dalmia material available on record. Application of mind is the sine qua non for forming the opinion. ii. CIT vs Daulat Ram Rawat Mull (87 ITR 349) (SC): It was held that assessee was not required to prove the source of the source. iii. 190 ITR 396 (Born): It was held that the assessee having discharged the initial burden, by giving complete name and address of the bankers and confirmation letters, it was for the Income-tax Officer to show that the explanation rendered by the assessee was n…

Bright Steel Centre, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3005/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am M/S. Bright Steel Centre Vs. Ito 19(1)(2) 72, Cp Tank Road Mumbai 1St Floor, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No.Aadf89916F Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…cumstances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents. 7.5 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 GT 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. Therefore, onus is always on a person who asserts a proposition or fact, which is not self evident. However, in the instant case, the appellant has miserably failed t…

Delicate Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 3253/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 3185/Del/2015 (A.Y .2011-12)

Section 132Section 234BSection 68

…y the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material and thereby an issue of law arises.” 30. Similarly, the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull reported in 87 ITR 349 has observed as under :- “The onus to prove that the apparent is not the real is on the party who claims it to be so. As it was the department which claimed that the amount of fixed deposit receipt belonged to the respondent firm even though the receipt had been issued in the name of Biswanath, the burden lay on the department to prove that the r…

Pavitra Realcon Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 3185/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 3185/Del/2015 (A.Y .2011-12)

Section 132Section 234BSection 68

ITO (Exemptions), New Delhi vs. Delhi Vocational School Society, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue on solitary ground is dismissed

ITA 1151/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishiito(Exemptions), Vs. Delhi Vocational School Trust Ward-Iii, Aayakar Bhawan, Society, Laxmu Nagar, Distt. Centre, C/O. Summer Fields School, New Delhi Kailash Colony, New Delhi Pan:Aabcs4104H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 140Section 2Section 60Section 69B

…nding can an addition be made u/s 69B. So far as regards investment over and above that recorded in the books of account, the onus, rather the burden, is on the department to prove such allegation, as has been held in, inter alia, CIT v. Daulat Mal Rawat Mal, 87 ITR 349 (SC), K.P. Verghese v. ITO, 131 ITR 597 (SC) and CIT v. Bedi & Co. (P) Ltd., 230 ITR 580 (SC). The department has argued that in the present case, the assessee did not cooperate in the assessment proceedings with the Assessing Officer and so, the onus on the department is Page 5 of 10 deemed to have been discharged. In this regard, it is seen that…

Ravindra R. Fotedar, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6778/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P K Bansal & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2010 – 2011 Ravindra R Fotedar Acit 10(2) 7 Bharat Tirth Society, Mumbai Vs. Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai 400 071 Pan Aacpf1616R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar

Section 2(22)(e)

…e consistently taken a view that trade advances made for procuring/ securing goods or services, it would not attract provisions of Section 2(22)(e). 8. This is settled law in view of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC)that apparent is real. Onus is on the party who alleges apparent is not real. In view of the settled position of various decisions, the trade advance cannot be regarded to be the transaction falling within the meaning of section 2(22)(e) of the Act. Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has taken the similar view in the case of CIT vs. Atul Enginee…

DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Futura Infraprojects Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 4403/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-1(1)(2) Futura Infraprojects 579, Aayakarbhavan, Ltd. 303, 3Rd Floor, Vs. M.K. Road Rajendra Chambers (W) Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400001. Pan No. Aaacf6879R Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Assessee By: Mr. Narayan Atal, Ar Date Of Hearing : 16/08/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/08/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Narayan Atal, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR

Section 143(3)Section 69

…produce the stock register, the AO has made addition on the basis of information received from the Sales Tax Department. In view of the above, the written submission filed by the Ld. DR does not address the instant case In CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC); CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540, 545 (SC), it has been held that 5 the onus to prove that the apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to do so. The AO in the instant case has failed to do so. In view of the above, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 7 vs. Bikram Singh

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

ITA/55/2017HC Delhi25 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 68

…transaction is a loan and that this initial onus on the Assessee has not been discharged. He relies upon Parimisetti Seetharanamma v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1965) 57 ITR 532 (hereafter ‘Parimisetti’) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull 87 ITR 349 (hereafter ‘Daulat Ram’). Mr. Bhatia took the Court through each of the transactions and the documents filed by the Assessee to defend the deletions made by the ITAT and submitted that the genuineness of each transaction is in severe doubt. He also relied upon CIT ITA No.55/2017 Page 13 of 25 v. Divine Leasing & Finance Ltd. (2008) 299 ITR 268 (…

DCIT, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Pyramid Tradelinks Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 512/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Jul 2017AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri D.C. Kothari (CIT)

…to assessee company without any material or evidence that assessee company also followed it. The ordinary presumption of law is that apparent state of affairs is real unless the contrary is proved (Kalva Vs. Union of India 49 ITR 165 (SC), CIT Vs. Daulat Ram 87 ITR 349, 360-61 (SC). The presumption is in favour of good faith and non-concealment of income and the initial burden of finding some material in support of finding of concealed income is on department (CIT Vs. Swami 241 ITR 363). In view of this position of law and there being no material or evidence against assessee company the loss of Rs. 6,18,87,318/-…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Core Agencies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1905/DEL/2011[1997-98]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2017AY 1997-98

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahui.T. Appeal Nos. 1590 & 1905/Del/2011 Assessment Years : 1996-97 & 1997-98. Income Tax Officer, M/S. Core Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Ward : 3 (4), Vs. 401–Padma Tower–Ii, New Delhi. 22, Rajendra Place, N E W D E L H I 110 008. Pan : Aaacc 2712 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…In other words, the order of the Delhi Tribunal was not complied with. 11. There is no doubt that income tax is a levy on income. Here the ld. Assessing Officer has alleged that the apparent is not real. However, as held in CIT Vs. Daulatram Rawatmal (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC). It is now settled law that the onus of proving that the apparent is not the real is on the party who claims it to be so. Here, the onus lay on the Revenue to prove the same as it was the Department which was emphasizing that the transactions and the consequent losses were sham. This allegation remains unproved. 12. In view of the discussion…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Core Agencies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1590/DEL/2011[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2017AY 1996-97

For Appellant: Shri Satyen Sethi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

ITO, WD-5(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Blessing Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result we set aside the order of the Ld

ITA 271/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2017AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon‟Ble Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 271/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2010-11 I.T.O., Ward-5(3), Kolkata -Vs.- M/S. Blessings Commercial Pvt. Ltd. 228A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aaccb 1349 N] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Goulen Hangshing, Cit, Dr. For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2017 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Vi, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”), Dt. 19/11/2013, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The „Act‟), Relating To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts In Brief:- The Assessee Is A Company & Is Engaged In The Business Of Finance & Investment. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2011-12 On 22/09/2010, Declaring –Nil- Income. It Showed A Loss Of Rs.668/-. The Facts As Recorded By The Assessing Officer In The Assessment Order Are Extracted Below:- “Para 1.2.1 The Assessee Has Shown Receipt Of Under Mentioned Share Capital Of Rs.1,90,00,000/- & Share Premium Of Rs.188,10,00,000/- During The Asst. Year 2010-11. The Assessee Credited Rs.1,90,00,000/- In Total In Its Books Against The Above Receipts. The Assessee Claimed That The Detail Of Receipts Are As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri Goulen Hangshing, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

Section 250

…es were not required to put on blinkers while looking at the documents produced before them. They were entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality of the recitals made in those documents." In CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349, the Supreme Court dealt with the question as to when the findings of facts recorded by the Tribunal can be interfered with in a reference made under section 66 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922. The Supreme Court referred to the leading case of Edwards ( Inspector of Taxes) v. Bairstow [1955] 28 ITR 579 (H.L.) decided by the House of Lords in wh…

ACIT, Meerut vs. M/S. Space Age Research & Technology Foundation Charitable Trust, Meerut

In the result Ground No. 1 and 3 of the appeal of the revenue is allowed and ground No

ITA 4622/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Space Age Research & Vs. Circle-2, Meerut Technology Foundation, Charitable Trust, Railway Road, Meerut Pan: Aabts7321M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Sapra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DR

Section 13(2)Section 13(3)Section 68

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT, Space Age Research & Vs. Circle-2, Meerut Technology Foundation, Charitable Trust, Railway Road, Meerut PAN: AABTS7321M (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No. 448/Del/2012 Space Age Research & Technology ACIT, Foundation, Charitable Trust, Circle-2, Meerut Railway Road, Meerut PAN: AABTS7321M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Sanjeev Sapra, Adv Revenue by: Sh. SS Rana, CIT DR Date of Hearing 02/05/2017 Date of pronouncement 23/05/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHA…

Data Infosys Limited, Alwar vs. DCIT, Alwar

In the result, revenue’s ground no

ITA 58/JPR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 May 2017AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri R.A.Verma (Addl. CIT)

Section 10ASection 35D

…ollowing cases:- M/s Data Infosys Ltd. vs.DCIT(Hqrs.), Alwar CIT Vs. Bedi & Co. Pvt. Ltd. 230 ITR 580 (SC): It was held that the burden of showing that the apparent state of affairs was not the real one was very heavy on the department. Daulat Ram Rawatmull 87 ITR 349 (SC): The fact that an assessee was unable to satisfy the authorities as to the source from which the depositor derived money cannot be used against assessee. The onus of proving that the apparent was not real is on the party who claims it to be so. From the simple fact that the explanation regarding the source of money furnished by A, in whose na…