Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

26 ITR 775Supreme Court of India1954#40 most cited

What is Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Corroborative evidence is essential to support evidence found on third-party premises, and an assessment cannot be based on suspicion, surmises, or conjecture.

1,061

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,164 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT · corroborative evidence · third-party premise · suspicion · surmises · conjecture · assessment · Income-tax Officer · evidence

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Agroha Fincap Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 1(4), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 8305/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.8305/िद"ी/2019 (िन.व. 2011-12) Agroha Fincap Ltd., C-51, Mahendru Enclave, G.T. Karnal Road, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant New Delhi 110033 Pan: Aaaca-8075-G बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), ..... "ितवादी/Respondent R.No. 398B, Cr Building, New Delhi 110002 अपीलाथ" "ारा/Appellant By : Shri Suraj Gupta, Advocate "ितवादी"ारा/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2025 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : : 19/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, New Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 20.08.2019, For Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Shri Suraj Gupta, Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee At The Outset Submitted That He Is Not Pressing Legal Ground Raised In Ground No. 2 Of Appeal. Thus, The Primary Issue For Adjudication In Appeal By The Assessee Is Addition Of Rs.25,00,000/- U/S. 68 Of The Income Tax Act,1961(Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) On Account Of Share Capital/Share Premium Received From M/S. Blue Bell Finance Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, SR.DR
Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…o Jain Brothers and in return has got the benefit of accommodation entries in the form of share capital/premium. It is well settled principle that suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot partake the character of evidence. [Re. Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR 775 (SC)] Hence, no addition can be made on suspicion and conjectures alone. Considering documents available on record, I find no reason to sustain the addition u/s. 68 of the Act. Therefore, addition of Rs.25,00,000/- is directed to be deleted. The ground no. 3 of appeal is thus, allowed. 6. In ground no. 4 of appeal, the assessee has assailed additi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Trichy vs. No 1 Auto Finance, Karur

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 658/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:656 To 658/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2015-16 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.1 Auto Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aahfn 3793 J] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:622 & 633/Chny/2025 धनिाजरण वर्ज / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Help Line Motor Finance, Central Circle – 2, Vs. No.1, Tam Complex, Nrmp Street, Trichy Covai Road, Karur – 639 002. [Pan:Aaffh 3971 E] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/Appellant By : Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri.R.Venkata Raman, Ca & Shri.R.S.Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Ms.E.Pavuna Sundari, CITFor Respondent: Shri.R.Venkata Raman, CA &
Section 132Section 143(3)

…al of the facts as brought out by the AO in the assessment order, such a burden has not been discharged by the revenue in the case of the Appellant. 6.3.15 As per the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Lids. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) corroborative evidence is essential to support the evidence found in third party premise. In order to properly appreciate the issue, it is useful to refer to the following extract from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC): "As regards the second contention, we are in entir…