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

Goutham Chand Munoth, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw -9(3), Chennai

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

ITA 879/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,…

Taruna Jain, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-9(3), Chennai

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

ITA 878/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,…

Narendra Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. ITO Ncw 5(2), Chennai

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

ITA 876/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,…

Nisha, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corp Cir-9(1), Chennai

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

ITA 875/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.406/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, No.10, Monteith Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 23(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor 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. The rele…

Hulas Kumar (HUF), Chennai vs. ACIT, Ncw 4(1), Chennai

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

ITA 410/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,…

Rajendra Kumar Hirawat (HUF), Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 23(1), Chennai

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

ITA 407/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.406/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, No.10, Monteith Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 23(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor 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. The rele…

Shri. Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 23 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 406/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.406/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Acit, Shri Rajendra Kumar Hirawat, No.10, Monteith Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 23(1), Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor 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. The rele…

Saroj Mootha, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward-6(3), Chennai

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

ITA 423/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.423/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Saroj Mootha, 31, Chandrappa Mudali Street, Non Corporate Ward – 6(3), Chennai – 600 079. Chennai.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

…al justice, the issue of the genuineness of the transactions require re-adjudication. Since, the right to exemption must be established by those who seek it, the onus therefore lies on the assessee. In order to claim the exemption from payment of 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 Tr…

Late. Navratan Lal Baid Rep by L/H Smt. Kamala Devi Baid, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(2), Chennai

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

ITA 1855/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1855/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Late Shri Navratan Lal Baid, Rep.By His L/H. Smt. Kamala Non-Corporate Ward – 5(2), Devi Baid, Chennai – 600 006. No.1, Kalathi Pillai Street, Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Aafpb9551N (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 : 27.08.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.08.2019

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 148

…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 Assessing Officer must keep in mind that the onus of proving the 5 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…

Arpana Garg, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw -(1), Chennai

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

ITA 3299/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.3299/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Arpana Garg, No.3082, Tvh Lumbini Square, Non Corporate Ward – 9(1), 127A, Bricklin Road, Chennai. Purasawalkkam, Chennai – 600 007. Pan: Agtpg3331K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri K. Balasubramainan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2019

For Appellant: Shri K. Balasubramainan, AdvocateFor 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 Assessing Officer 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 no…

Ashok Makwana (HUF), Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 9(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the each of the above assessee is dismissed

ITA 747/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Aug 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.746 /Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shri Ashok Batuklal Makwana, Flat No.E062, Door No.49, Non-Corporate Ward 9(1), Dlf Commanders Court, Chennai. Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Admpm1490R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.747/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Ashok Makwana (Huf) Flat No.E062, Door No.49, Non-Corporate Ward 9(1), Dlf Commanders Court, Chennai. Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aaiha5661B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Jcit

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

…y those who seek it , the onus therefore lies on the respective 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)). However, in these cases, it is seen from the orders of the Ld.CIT(A), supra, that the respective assessee has not placed relevant material and proved the genuineness of the impugned transactions. Although, an appeal against the above orders have been filed before this tribunal, even before us also, the respective assessee has not challenged…

Ashok Batuklal Makwana, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 9(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the each of the above assessee is dismissed

ITA 746/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.746 /Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Shri Ashok Batuklal Makwana, Flat No.E062, Door No.49, Non-Corporate Ward 9(1), Dlf Commanders Court, Chennai. Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Admpm1490R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.747/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Income Tax Officer, M/S. Ashok Makwana (Huf) Flat No.E062, Door No.49, Non-Corporate Ward 9(1), Dlf Commanders Court, Chennai. Ethiraj Salai, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aaiha5661B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Jcit

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 68

…y those who seek it , the onus therefore lies on the respective 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)). However, in these cases, it is seen from the orders of the Ld.CIT(A), supra, that the respective assessee has not placed relevant material and proved the genuineness of the impugned transactions. Although, an appeal against the above orders have been filed before this tribunal, even before us also, the respective assessee has not challenged…

Mukesh K.Jain, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(3), Chennai

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

ITA 2430/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2430/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Mukesh K Jain, Vs The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.504, Tower 2, Ananda Non Corporate Ward – 5(3), Door No.4,5,6 & 7, Chennai. Stepenson Road, North Town, Perambur Barracks, Chennai – 600 012. Pan: Aaipm5894Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Bharath,Cit

For Appellant: Shri H. Yeshwanth Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S. Bharath,CIT
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 4 materials which would enable them to come to a conclusion. (35 ITR 312 (SC)).Thus, the Assessing Officer 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 no…

Mohit Doshi, Chennai vs. ITO, Non Corp Ward -9(2), Chennai

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

ITA 822/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Rishab G, C/O Haveli Marbles & Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. Pan: Agcpr1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Padmanaban, CA &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन,"याियक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Shri Rishab G, C/o Haveli Marbles and Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. PAN: AGCPR1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.820/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष"…

Heerachand Lalitha Devi, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(2), Chennai

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

ITA 821/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Rishab G, C/O Haveli Marbles & Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. Pan: Agcpr1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Padmanaban, CA &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन,"याियक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Shri Rishab G, C/o Haveli Marbles and Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. PAN: AGCPR1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.820/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष"…

Gawtam Chand Sethiya, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corp Cir-8(1), Chennai

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

ITA 820/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Rishab G, C/O Haveli Marbles & Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. Pan: Agcpr1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Padmanaban, CA &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन,"याियक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Shri Rishab G, C/o Haveli Marbles and Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. PAN: AGCPR1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.820/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष"…

Rishab G, Chennai vs. DCIT, Non Corp Cir -8(1), Chennai

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

ITA 819/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri Rishab G, C/O Haveli Marbles & Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. Pan: Agcpr1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Padmanaban, CA &For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 10Section 10(38)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन,"याियक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.819/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Shri Rishab G, C/o Haveli Marbles and Granites, Income Tax, No.15, Poonamallee High Road, Non-Corporate Circle – 8(1), Koyambedu, Chennai – 34. Chennai – 600 107. PAN: AGCPR1277N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.820/CHNY/2019 ("नधा"रण वष"…

Nita Devi, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(2), Chennai

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

ITA 2663/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2657/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Khushbu Jain, No.31, Krishanappa Tank Street, Non Corporate Ward 5(1), 1St Floor, Sowcarpet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Arcpk1200H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2659/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Nirmala Devi Suresh Kumar, Non Corporate Ward 5(2), No.41, Narayana Mudall Street, Chennai. Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Aasps4466N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pr
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 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 Tr…

H.Kishore Jain HUF, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2662/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2657/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Khushbu Jain, No.31, Krishanappa Tank Street, Non Corporate Ward 5(1), 1St Floor, Sowcarpet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Arcpk1200H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2659/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Nirmala Devi Suresh Kumar, Non Corporate Ward 5(2), No.41, Narayana Mudall Street, Chennai. Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Aasps4466N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pr
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 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 Tr…

Jugrajji Babulal, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 4(5), Chennai

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

ITA 2661/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2657/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Khushbu Jain, No.31, Krishanappa Tank Street, Non Corporate Ward 5(1), 1St Floor, Sowcarpet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Arcpk1200H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2659/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Smt. Nirmala Devi Suresh Kumar, Non Corporate Ward 5(2), No.41, Narayana Mudall Street, Chennai. Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. Pan: Aasps4466N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pr
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 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 Tr…