CIT v. Ramkrishna Deo

35 ITR 312Supreme Court of India1959#1356 most cited

What is CIT v. Ramkrishna Deo authority for?

The burden of proving that a particular income is exempt from taxation, or is not taxable, lies on the assessee. To claim an exemption or a deduction, the assessee must provide proper materials to establish eligibility.

84

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ramakrishna Deo · 35 ITR 312 SC · burden of proof · onus on assessee · income tax exemption · proving eligibility · section 10 exemption · section 54F deduction · section 80P deduction · agricultural income exemption

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 10Section 139(1)Section 147Section 54FSection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)(i)

Issues it is cited on

nfac

Judgments citing CIT v. Ramkrishna Deo

J.Ashok Kumar & Sons, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 10(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2519/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2519/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri J. Ashok Kumar & Sons, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.30, Market Street, Perambur, Non-Corporate Ward-10(2), Chennai – 600 029. Chennai. [Pan: Aaahj 2809N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. The rele…

Mr. Ashok Kumar, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 10 (1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2518/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2518/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri J. Ashok Kumar, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No.30, Market Street, Perambur, Non-Corporate Ward-10(2), Chennai – 600 029. Chennai. [Pan: Aabpa 8435C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Ar V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.11.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29 .11.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. Jayaraman:

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. The rele…

Late Sanjay Agarwal, Rep by Bapita Agarwal, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1322/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni
Section 10

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in :- 5 -: mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence.…

Maruti Nivrutti Navale, (Smaller HUF), Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 542/PUN/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 367/PUN/2017[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/PUN/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/PUN/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 364/PUN/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 363/PUN/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 362/PUN/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 361/PUN/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

M N Navale Bigger HUF, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 360/PUN/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Nov 2019AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl. No.

For Appellant: Shri Chetan KariaFor Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad &
Section 171

…r and so on and issuance of 7/12 extracts. MPKV Data Procurement: The Assessing Officer further noticed that since the assessee is claiming to have such a huge exempt income, the onus was on the assessee to establish it. In the case of CIT Vs. Ramkrishna Deo, 35 ITR 312, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that “the law is well settled that it is for a person who claims exemption to establish it and there is no reason why it would be otherwise when the exemption claimed is under the Income Tax Act. A person who claims the benefit of an exemption has to establish it.” In the case of Gopi Ram Lila Vs. CIT,…

Mangal Chand HUF, Chennai vs. ITO Ncw 10(3), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 347/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Nov 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.347/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. G Mangalchand (Huf), C/O. Shri P. Pradeep Kumar, Ca, Non-Corporate Ward 10(3), #130, (Old No.106), Chennai. Vepery High Road, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. Pan: Aaahg1871M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J. Pavitran Kumar, Jcit

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri J. Pavitran Kumar, JCIT
Section 10(38)Section 68

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the Assessing Officer does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evi…

Ranautar Agarwal, Chennai vs. ACIT, Non Corp Cir-10(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 211/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Smt. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCITFor Respondent: 20.08.2019
Section 10Section 10(38)

…ablished by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)). Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. This…

Phool Chand Mangal Chand, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Wrd 14(3), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1495/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Smt. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCITFor Respondent: 20.08.2019
Section 10Section 10(38)

…tablished by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)). Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. This…

Dhiraj Kumar Premchand, Thirukazhukundram vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 23(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1484/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Smt. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCITFor Respondent: 19.08.2019
Section 10Section 10(38)

…stablished by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)). Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. This…

Ayush Jain, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw 4(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 889/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.410/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, M/S. Hulas Kumar (Huf), L. Nahata & Co., Non-Corporate Ward – 4(1), 120, Nyniappa Naicken Street, Chennai. Part Town, Chennai – 600 003. Pan: Aaahh0807C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.889/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Ito, Shri Ayush Jain, L. Nahata & Co., Non-Corporate Ward – 4(1), 120, Nyniappa Naicken Street, Chennai. Part Town, Chennai – 600 003. Pan: Atapj5535G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Lakshmichand Nahata, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri Lakshmichand Nahata, FCAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. Further,…

Vinod Kumar Bantia, Chennai vs. ITO Ncw 6(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 882/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.876/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, 44/39, E.K. Agraharam Street, Non-Corporate Ward 5(2), Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. Chennai.

Section 10(38)

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. Further,…

Mootha Kanjayalal Pramod Kumar HUF, Chennai vs. ITO Ncw 5(3), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 881/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.876/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, 44/39, E.K. Agraharam Street, Non-Corporate Ward 5(2), Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. Chennai.

Section 10(38)

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. Further,…

Vikas Kothari, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-6(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 880/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.876/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shri Narendra Kumar Jain, 44/39, E.K. Agraharam Street, Non-Corporate Ward 5(2), Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. Chennai.

Section 10(38)

…established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of income tax, the assessee had to put before the Income Tax authorities proper materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the AO must keep in mind that the onus of proving the exemption rests on the assessee. If the AO does have any evidence to the contrary, it is to be put to the assessee for his rebuttal. The internal communications of the Revenue are evidences for drawing an opinion on possible wrong claims but they are not the final evidence. Further,…