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 367,164 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

Venkateshwara Wires Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 801ASection 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 322/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year: 2018-19 cuke Venkateswara Wires Pvt Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of Vs. E-55, Road No. 5, VKI Area, Income Tax, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCV 5085 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar, Adv. jktLo dh vksj…

Padmavati Agrico (India) Pvt Ltd, Ajmer vs. ACIT Circle - 1, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 702/JPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 143Section 147

…rd party, it can’t be burdened with 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: - a. 24 Tax World146 Sideways Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (JP ITAT) b. 87 ITR 349 CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmal (SC) c. 103 ITR 344 Saraogi Credit Corp. Vs. CIT (PAT) 19 Padmavati Agrico (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT It is further relevant to state that on perusal of the assessment order it is evident fact that the Ld. AO has summarily rejected the evidence submitted by the assessee and made no effort to bring on record some mate…

Surabhi Entertainment Private Limited ( Previously Known As Pearls Entertainment Private Limited), New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-24(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal stands dismissed on merit

ITA 9736/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68

…explanation should be accepted or not is not to be examined factually but having regard to test of human probabilities and normal course of conduct. Reference can be made to CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC), CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull, [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) and other cases referred to in CIT v. Nova Promoters & Finlease (P.) Ltd. (2012) 342 ITR 169/206 Taxman 207/18 taxmann.com 217 (Delhi). In these cases, it has been observed that what is apparent must be considered real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real. Caution must be exercised on self-serving…

Meher Ghanshym Lalwani, Santacruz West, Mumbai vs. ITO, 24 (2) (5), Piramal Chambers, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1203/MUM/2024[AY 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agrawal, A/RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D/R
Section 131Section 68Section 69C

…pect of the I.T.A. No. 1203/Mum/2024 4 purchase invoices or the sale invoices or the D-mat statement. Prima facie, the assessee has explained the genuineness of the transactions. 9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Daulat Ram rawatmull ( 1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC), has held that the onus to prove that the apparent is not the real is on the party who claims it to be so. Since the allegation of the revenue authorities is that, the sale transactions are sham transactions, then the onus squarely lies upon them to demonstrate by bringing cogent material on record which in the present case on hand, the lower…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 109/NAG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69A

…HC) (Refer page 75-81 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Navjivan Oil Mills v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 124 Taxman 392 (Gujarat HC) (Refer page 82-90 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull* [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (Refer page 91-105 of paper book); Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya ITA no.106 to 109/Nag./2023 • Copy of Judgment in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax* [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) (Refer page 106-116 of paper book).” 10. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order of the Assessing Officer be resto…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centrll Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 108/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69A

…HC) (Refer page 75-81 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Navjivan Oil Mills v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 124 Taxman 392 (Gujarat HC) (Refer page 82-90 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull* [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (Refer page 91-105 of paper book); Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya ITA no.106 to 109/Nag./2023 • Copy of Judgment in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax* [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) (Refer page 106-116 of paper book).” 10. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order of the Assessing Officer be resto…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 107/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69A

…HC) (Refer page 75-81 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Navjivan Oil Mills v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 124 Taxman 392 (Gujarat HC) (Refer page 82-90 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull* [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (Refer page 91-105 of paper book); Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya ITA no.106 to 109/Nag./2023 • Copy of Judgment in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax* [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) (Refer page 106-116 of paper book).” 10. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order of the Assessing Officer be resto…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Nagpur vs. Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue for the assessment year

ITA 106/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153CSection 69A

…HC) (Refer page 75-81 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Navjivan Oil Mills v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2002] 124 Taxman 392 (Gujarat HC) (Refer page 82-90 of paper book); • Copy of Judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull* [1973] 87 ITR 349 (SC) (Refer page 91-105 of paper book); Shri Biharilal Shadhuram Chhabriya ITA no.106 to 109/Nag./2023 • Copy of Judgment in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax* [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) (Refer page 106-116 of paper book).” 10. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the order of the Assessing Officer be resto…

Pawan Gupta, Kota vs. ITO Ward 1(3) Kota, Kota

ITA 252/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2024AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodia AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…6 (Raipur) (Trib.) 1.17 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 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…

Madan Mohan Gupta, Kota vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Kota

ITA 246/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2024AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodia AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…6 (Raipur) (Trib.) 1.17 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 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…

Rajrajeshwari Gupta, Kota vs. ITO, Ward 1(1), Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 245/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Sisodia AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…(Raipur) (Trib.) 1.16 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT [1959] 37 ITR 151 (SC) had held that no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. In the case of CIT v. 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…

Sparrows Home Appliances Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO-11(2)-3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 272/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2012-13 Sparrows Home Ito- Ward 11(2)-3 Appliances Private Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Limited 803, 8Th Floor, New Marine Lines, Jay Antriksh, Vs. Churchgate, Makhwana Road, Mumbai- 400020. Marol Naka, Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400059. Pan: Aaocs5028F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For : Assessee By : Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, A.R. Revenue By : Shri R. R. Makwana- Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana- SR. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sparrows Home ITO- Ward 11(2)-3 Appliances Private Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Limited 803, 8th Floor, New Marine Lines, Jay Antriksh, Vs. Churchgate, Makhwana Road, Mumbai- 400020. Marol Naka, Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400059. PAN: AAOCS5028F (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for : Assessee by : Ms. Kinjal Bhuta, A.R. Revenue by : Shri R. R. Makwana- SR. D.R. Date of Hearing : 25 . 06 . 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26 . 07 . 2…

ACIT, Circle-1, Tirunelveli vs. Esakkimuthu Muthuvel Iyappan, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 794/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.794/Chny/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-2018) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Esakkimuthu Muthuvel Iyappan, Income Tax, No.4, Highways Road, Circle 1, Tisayanvilai, Tirunelveli 627 011. Tirunelveli 627 657. [Pan : Arupm 4796J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…assessee’s sales predominantly in cash, and thus, the cash in hand shown by the assessee as in November 2016 appear to be genuine and bona fide. AO in its routed its own unaccounted money in the garb of cash sales. In CIT versus Daulat Ram Rawat Mull, (1973) 87 ITR 349, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that onus of proving what was apparent is not real is on the party who claims it to be so. There should be some direct nexus between the conclusions of fact arrived at by the authorities concerned and the primary facts upon which the conclusion is based. Use of extraneous or irrelevant material in arriving at the co…

Dayal Agro Products Ltd, Akola vs. JCIT, Akola Range, Akola

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 201/NAG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.P.Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT DR
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA No. 201/Nag./2017 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Dayal Agro Products Ltd. Dayal House, New Radhakisan Plots, Akola. ……………. Appellant PAN : AABCD2713R v/s Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Akola Range, Akola ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri K.P.Dewani, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT DR. Date of Hearing – 09/07/2024 Date of Order – 16/07/2024 O R D E R PER K.M.ROY, A.M. The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee challenging the impugned orde…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle ( Exemption ), Nagpur vs. M/S Shri Dadasaheb Gawai, Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2/NAG/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 115BSection 12A

…of donation is not required to call for and maintain these details. Though, most of the donors, examined by the AO, have submitted these details also in remand proceedings. IN any case, it has been held by various courts [CIT Vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Mull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC); Labh Chand Bohra vs. ITO (2010) 189 Taxman 141 (Raj)] that capacity of the done is not a matter which would be required by the recipient to be established. Section 115 BBC (30 provides that the receiver has the obligation to maintain the identity indicating the name and address of the donor and such other particulars as may be prescribed. No…

Jagbir Singh Nehra Prop. Shiv Shankar Fruit Company Jalandhar-I, Grain Market S.O Jalandhar, Jalandhar vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-3 Ludhiana, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 687/CHANDI/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jun 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 687/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Jagbir Singh Nehra Vs. The Dcit, बनाम Prop. Shiv Shankar Fruit Company, Central Circle-3, Jalandhar-1, Ludhiana Grain Market S.O. Jalandhar-1, Jalandhar "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ayqps0736D अपीलाथ" ./ Appellant ""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 132

…rghese, reported in 131 ITR 597. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has also failed to appreciate that the documentary evidence had to be relied upon against the oral evidence as per binding judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Daulat Ram Rawat Mull, reported in 87 ITR 349. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 10 lacs on the basis of dump document, though, the addition has been deleted for statistical purpose. 5. That the addition has been made against the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is f…

DCIT, Central Circle-2.4, Chennai vs. Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao, Chennai

Accordingly, cross- objections for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 stands dismissed

ITA 225/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.223/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpr-2074-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.10/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.223/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.11/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.224/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.12/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.225/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम/ Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Central Circle-1(4)

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 144

…corroborative material evidencing that these payments have been made. Mere notings in an unauthenticated document could not form the basis of addition. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Mull (87 ITR 349) holding that onus was on revenue to bring on record evidence / material to show that the alleged investment was made by the assessee. The assessee also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CBI vs. V.C. Shukla (AIR SC 410) holding that loose sheets and entries in diaries could not be considered as account books of a party…

DCIT, Central Circle-2.4, Chennai vs. Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao, Chennai

Accordingly, cross- objections for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 stands dismissed

ITA 224/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.223/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpr-2074-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.10/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.223/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.11/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.224/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.12/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.225/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम/ Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Central Circle-1(4)

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 144

…corroborative material evidencing that these payments have been made. Mere notings in an unauthenticated document could not form the basis of addition. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Mull (87 ITR 349) holding that onus was on revenue to bring on record evidence / material to show that the alleged investment was made by the assessee. The assessee also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CBI vs. V.C. Shukla (AIR SC 410) holding that loose sheets and entries in diaries could not be considered as account books of a party…

DCIT, Central Circle-2.4, Chennai vs. Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao, Chennai

Accordingly, cross- objections for AYs 2015-16 and 2016-17 stands dismissed

ITA 223/CHNY/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jmand Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.223/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.224/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.225/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao बनाम Central Circle-2(4) No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, 6Th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai-600 040. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafpr-2074-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) & 4. Cross Objection No.10/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.223/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & 5. Cross Objection No.11/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.224/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 6. Cross Objection No.12/Chny/2023 (In Ita No.225/Chny/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 बनाम/ Dcit Shri P. Rama Mohan Rao No.17/184, Y Block, First Street, Central Circle-1(4)

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar (CIT)- Ld. DR
Section 144

…corroborative material evidencing that these payments have been made. Mere notings in an unauthenticated document could not form the basis of addition. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawat Mull (87 ITR 349) holding that onus was on revenue to bring on record evidence / material to show that the alleged investment was made by the assessee. The assessee also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CBI vs. V.C. Shukla (AIR SC 410) holding that loose sheets and entries in diaries could not be considered as account books of a party…

Fashion Zone, Ludhiana vs. JCIT, Ward III(2), Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 331/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Rishabh Marwah, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 145(3)Section 68

…hone Company of India Ltd. 265 ITR (Kol-Trib) 46 (AT)  DCIT Vs. D.N. Kamani (HUF) 70 ITD (Patna-Trib) 77  Elite Developers Vs.. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 73 ITD (Nagpur-Trib) 379  Monga Metals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 67 TTJ (All) 247  Daulat Ram Rawatmull 87 ITR 349 (SC) 10.5 It was accordingly submitted that the addition as made by the Assessing Officer by applying the provisions of sec 68 of the Act is totally against the law as the Assessee has been maintaining audited books of accounts. The VAT department has not doubted the trading results of the Assessee. Even the Assessing Officer has not rejected the…