CIT v. Paramanand Uttamchand

146 ITR 430High Court1984#19242 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 69Section 69A

Judgments citing CIT v. Paramanand Uttamchand

KALYANASUNDARAVALLI PREMANANDHAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP. WARD 8(2) CHE, CHENNAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1051/CHNY/2025[2017 - 2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1051/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Kalyanasundaravalli Premanandhan, The Ito, 52/A1, Amaravathy Nagar, Non-Corporate Ward-8(2), Chennai-600 106. Chennai.

For Appellant: Mr.J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 69A

…mentary evidence, including bank statements highlighting the relevant transactions. Judicial precedents recognizing the concept of household savings or "pin money" maintained by Indian women were also cited, such as:  CIT v. Paramanand Uttamchand [(1984) 146 ITR 430 (Mad.)],  R.B.N.J. Naidu v. CIT [(1956) 29 ITR 194 (Nag.)], and  R. Dalmia (decd.) v. CIT [(1981) 133 ITR 169 (Del.)]. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in haste and under pressure during peak demonetization, provided a letter to the bank manager indicating that the deposited cash was a repayment of a hand loan from a third part…

AROON PURIE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA-232/2002HC Delhi27 Mar 2015
Section 10Section 260A

…ove and affection, as the assessed had served in his capacity as general attorney, was held to be not taxable as it was not in the nature of remuneration paid, but a transaction of gift. 33. The Madras High Court in CIT vs. Paramanand Uttamchand, (1984) 146 ITR 430, had to grapple with the issue, whether presents worth Rs.19,242/-, received at the time of Grih Pravesh ceremony from relations, friends and well-wishers would be taxable. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee by observing that it was not something earned and the payments were merely a gift and a windfall. These were gifts of a…

AROON PURIE vs. COMMR.OF INCOME TAX

ITA - 232 / 2002HC Delhi27 Mar 2015
Section 10Section 260A

…ove and affection, as the assessed had served in his capacity as general attorney, was held to be not taxable as it was not in the nature of remuneration paid, but a transaction of gift. 33. The Madras High Court in CIT vs. Paramanand Uttamchand, (1984) 146 ITR 430, had to grapple with the issue, whether presents worth Rs.19,242/-, received at the time of Grih Pravesh ceremony from relations, friends and well-wishers would be taxable. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee by observing that it was not something earned and the payments were merely a gift and a windfall. These were gifts of a…

AROON PURIE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/232/2002HC Delhi27 Mar 2015
Section 10Section 260A

…ove and affection, as the assessed had served in his capacity as general attorney, was held to be not taxable as it was not in the nature of remuneration paid, but a transaction of gift. 33. The Madras High Court in CIT vs. Paramanand Uttamchand, (1984) 146 ITR 430, had to grapple with the issue, whether presents worth Rs.19,242/-, received at the time of Grih Pravesh ceremony from relations, friends and well-wishers would be taxable. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee by observing that it was not something earned and the payments were merely a gift and a windfall. These were gifts of a…

CIT v. Paramanand Uttamchand (146 ITR 430) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax