CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

…ad More [1969] 72 ITR 807 (SC) are the landmark decisions. The ratio laid down therein are that if the explanation of the assessee is unsatisfactory, the amount can be treated as income of the assessee. The ratio laid down in CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmal [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) further throws light on the issue. In the case of a cash entry, it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of the creditor but also the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transactions. The onus lies on the assessee, under the facts available on record. A harmonious construction of section 106 of the evidence…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralcircle-2, Jaipur

…ad More [1969] 72 ITR 807 (SC) are the landmark decisions. The ratio laid down therein are that if the explanation of the assessee is unsatisfactory, the amount can be treated as income of the assessee. The ratio laid down in CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmal [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) further throws light on the issue. In the case of a cash entry, it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of the creditor but also the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transactions. The onus lies on the assessee, under the facts available on record. A harmonious construction of section 106 of the evidence…

Kailash Chand Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…ad More [1969] 72 ITR 807 (SC) are the landmark decisions. The ratio laid down therein are that if the explanation of the assessee is unsatisfactory, the amount can be treated as income of the assessee. The ratio laid down in CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmal [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) further throws light on the issue. In the case of a cash entry, it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of the creditor but also the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transactions. The onus lies on the assessee, under the facts available on record. A harmonious construction of section 106 of the evidence…

Kath Brothers, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…ad More [1969] 72 ITR 807 (SC) are the landmark decisions. The ratio laid down therein are that if the explanation of the assessee is unsatisfactory, the amount can be treated as income of the assessee. The ratio laid down in CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmal [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) further throws light on the issue. In the case of a cash entry, it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of the creditor but also the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transactions. The onus lies on the assessee, under the facts available on record. A harmonious construction of section 106 of the evidence…

Sh. Trilok Chand Sain, Dausa vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Alwar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

…rship to determine the real owner. 2. CIT vs. P. Mohanakala (2007) 291 ITR 278 (SC)  The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that where transactions lack credibility, an adverse inference is justified. 8 Shri Trilok Chand Sain, Dausa. 3. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC)  Burden of proof lies on the assessee to prove that he is not the real owner if found in possession of assets. 4. Non-Cooperation Justifies Adverse Inference – No Protection for Assessee’s Intentional Default (A) Continuous Failure to Comply with Notices Notice Type Date of Issue Due Date Response from Assessee 142(1) Notice 01/03/2023 07/03…

Alok Kumar Jain, Pearl Pleasure vs. ACIT Cir-6, Jaipur, New Cerntral Revenue Building, Bhagwan Dass Road, Rajasthan

Bench: Him.

…e Assesse has duly discharged its burden by proving the claim of exemption by leading supporting evidences, including third party evidences, which have not been rebutted. Further reliance is placed on principle laid down in CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull [1973] 87 ITR 349 for proposition that burden of proof that apparent is not real or claim of bogus transaction in on department (person who alleges that apparent is not real or there is Alok Kumar Jain vs. ACIT/DCIT Para Argument by department in their written Rejoinder by the Assessee-Appellant submission filed during hearing on 16.01.2025 bogus transaction). C.…

Ram Swaroop Balai, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

…be correct unless proved otherwise [S.69A, High Denomination Bank Notes (Demonetisations) Ordinance, 1946, Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, S.23 ] And the above said judgement is followed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Daulat Ram Rawatmull v. CIT (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC) stating that Once an affidavit is furnished, it should be presumed to be a correct statement of facts. If these facts are to be controverted, either the deponent must be examined or evidence contrary to facts must be led. In the absence of these the affidavits could not be ignored. Ground No. 3 objections not disposed off; Apropos to this gro…

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…h the procedure laid down in the law and fully evidenced. No defects have been pointed out in these. Therefore, the transaction must be accepted as genuine. We rely on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), wherein it was held that the onus of proving that the apparent was not real was on the party who claimed it to be so. However ld AO was absolutely silent about the following questions:- i To whom cash was given by the assessee company? ii On what date cash was given by the assessee company? iii Where the cash was given by the assessee compan…

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

…h the procedure laid down in the law and fully evidenced. No defects have been pointed out in these. Therefore, the transaction must be accepted as genuine. We rely on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), wherein it was held that the onus of proving that the apparent was not real was on the party who claimed it to be so. However ld AO was absolutely silent about the following questions:- i To whom cash was given by the assessee company? ii On what date cash was given by the assessee company? iii Where the cash was given by the assessee compa…

Kiran Fine Jewellers Private Limited, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result ground no 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…ad More [1969] 72 ITR 807 (SC) are the landmark decisions. The ratio laid down therein are that if the explanation of the assessee is unsatisfactory, the amount can be treated as income of the assessee. The ratio laid down in CII v. Daulat Ram Rawatmal [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) further throws light on the issue. In the case of a cash entry, it is necessary for the assessee to prove not only the identity of 47 Kiran Fine Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT the creditor but also the capacity of the creditor and genuineness of the transactions. The onus lies on the assessee, under the facts available on record. A harmonious…