How many judgments cite Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT?

1,061 judgments on BharatTax cite Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (26 ITR 775), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 132, Section 68, Section 153C, Section 153A, Section 132(4).

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 367,302 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

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132 Section 68 Section 153C Section 153A Section 132(4)Section 115BBE Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 23(3)circular trading section 132(4a)dumb documents section 292c rejection of books of account loose papers section 145(3)documents seized section 34 section 145 on-money

Judgments citing Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Avinash Narayan Sutar, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 28(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the three appeals filed by the asssessee are allowed

ITA 1029/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita Nos. 1029, 1030 & 1031/Mum/2020 (A.Ys: 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2010-11) Avinash Narayan Sutar Vs. Ito – 28(1)(2) Plot No. 582, Laxmi Tower No.6, Vashi Niwas, Sector -1, Station, Navi Mumbai- Shiravana, Nerul, Navi 400703. Mumbai – 400706. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Arsps9036R Appellant .. Respondent Ito – 28(1)(2) Vs. Avinash Narayan Sutar Tower No.6, Vashi Plot No. 582, Laxmi Station, Navi Mumbai- Niwas, Sector -1, 400703. Shiravana, Nerul, Navi Mumbai – 400706. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Arsps9036R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Hariom Tulsiyan.ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha.DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ITA No. 1029, 1030, 1031& 1321/Mum/2020 M/s. Avinash Narayan Sutar, Mumbai. more than mere suspicion to fasten any liability on the assessee. The Ld.AR relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) placed at Page Nos. 279-286 of the Paper book-II where the court has held as under: "... it is equally clear that in making the assessment under sub- section 3 of section 23 of the, Act, the Income-tax Officer is not entitled to make a pure guess and make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material at all. There must be s…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Mysore vs. Mr. Shorff Krishnarajasetty Satheesha, Kodagu

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 997/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…ee on 02.03.2021 was an empty formality in as much as no cogent opportunity was afforded to the assessee. For this, reliance is placed on the following decisions: - Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India (247 ITR 274) (SC) - Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT (26 ITR 775) - CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (418 ITR 315) (SC) - Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. v. CCE (62 taxmann.com 3) (SC) - CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (421 ITR 686) (Bom HC) 12. For the reasons set out above therefore, it is thus submitted that the contentions put forth by the Ld. CIT, DR deserves to be rejected. The facts on record clearly show…

Rupesh Vyas, Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 909/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore07 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Shri Rupesh Vyas ACIT-3(1) Indore Indore Vs. (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: ACUPV 3307 M Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement 07.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 20.09.2018 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Indore [“Ld. CIT(A)”], wh…

Rupesh Vyas, Indore vs. The ACIT3(1), Indore

In the result, this appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 50/IND/2020[150-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) Shri Rupesh Vyas DCIT-3(1) Indore Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: ACUPV 3307 M Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement 6.12.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 18.11.2019 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Indore [“Ld. CIT(A)”],…

The ACIT Central -1, Bhopal vs. Shri Sunil Sahu, Raipur

ITA 355/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69A

…at AO cannot make any addition merely on basis of suspicion, however strong it may be. The AO is not justified in presuming certain facts without having anything to corroborate. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v/s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has ITA No.355/Ind/2020 & Ors. (ACIT vs. Shri Sunil Sahu) A.Y.– 2013-14 & Ors. - 21 - been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspici…

Sunil Sahu, Raipur vs. ACIT(Central)-2, Bhopal

ITA 158/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69A

Sunil Sahu, Raipur vs. ACIT(Central)-2, Bhopal

ITA 157/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69A

Sunil Sahu, Raipur vs. ACIT(Central)-2, Bhopal

ITA 156/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69A

Dy.C.I.T. Cent. Cir-6(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Dilip B.Jiwrajka, Mumbai

In the result, the Cross Objections for AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14

ITA 2349/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 69C

…Bros. V/s CIT (1959 37 ITR 271). The additions made on mere presumptions could not be sustained and there must be something more than mere suspicion to support the assessment as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. V/s CIT (26 ITR 775). The assessment should not be based merely on suspicion or guess work but on legitimate material from which reasonable inference of income could have been drawn. 4.8 The last aspect of the matter is that the additions have been made by Ld. AO invoking the provisions of Section 68. The addition u/s 68, in our considered opinion, is not sustainable…

ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi vs. Anand Divine Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.4499/Del

ITA 4499/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

…of tax and are not claiming any exemption, therefore, there is no loss to the revenue and accordingly there is no need for any disallowance u/s 40A(2) of the Act. Further reliance is also placed on the judgment of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) wherein the Court has held that the Revenue Authorities cannot resort to ad- hoc adjustment without any reasonable basis. The 16 ITA.No.4498/Del./2017 M/s. Anand Divine Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. observations of Hon’ble Supreme Court are as under : ‘in making an assessment under section 23(3) of the Indian Income Tax Act, the Income ta…

ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi vs. Anand Divine Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.4499/Del

ITA 4498/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

ACIT Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. Mahendra Kumar Agarwal, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 172/JPR/2022[ABUPK2500L]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Khejrolia (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…made in the income of the assessee only on the basis of suspicion. Suspicion howsoever strong but cannot partake the character of evidence. The reliance is placed on following decisions: - i) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) Case Law PB page 83-89 ii) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1959] 37 ITR 271 (SC) Case Law PB page 90-85 iii) CIT vs. Kapil Nagpal, DBITA 609/2014 (Delhi HC) Case Law PB page 96-104 iv) Goyal Gases (P.) Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1997] 94 TAXMAN 57 (DELHI) Case Law PB page 105-106 It is admitted position of law…

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Raj Kumar Nowal, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 165/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Khejrolia (CA)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 143(3)Section 68

…made in the income of the assessee only on the basis of suspicion. Suspicion howsoever strong but cannot partake the character of evidence. The reliance is placed on following decisions: - i) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) Case Law PB page 83-89 ii) Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1959] 37 ITR 271 (SC) 11 Shri Raj Kumar Nowal, Jaipur. Case Law PB page 90-85 iii) CIT vs. Kapil Nagpal, DBITA 609/2014 (Delhi HC) Case Law PB page 96-104 iv) Goyal Gases (P.) Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1997] 94 TAXMAN 57 (DELHI) Case Law PB page 105-1…

Jugal Kishore Parwal, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(5), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 286/JPR/2022[1986-87]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 1986-87

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT

Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 273(2)(b)Section 282

…n and guess work ignoring the material evidences available or placed on record. 1.22 It is settled principle of law that an allegation remains a mere allegation unless proved. Suspicion cannot take the place of the reality. We rely- Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills, 26 ITR 775 (SC); R.B.N.J. Naidu v. CIT, 29 ITR 194 (Nag); Kanpur Steel Co. Ltd. v. CIT, 32 ITR 56 (All) and CIT v. Kulwant Rai, 291 ITR 36 (Del). 1.23 The finding of learned CIT(A) that affidavit is not notarized is perverse- As submitted here in above, the learned CIT(A) had suo moto issued a notice dated 04.05.2022 on assumption and presumptions that there…

Raj Auto Wheels (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 929/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

…as such contradictory approach established that the AO did not dealt as a quasi-judicial authority. He merely proceeded on his own whims and fancies. The ld. CIT(A) completely ignored this vital aspect going to the root. Kindly refer Dhakeshwari cotton Mills 26 ITR 775 (SC). 8. Settled Past Practice: 8.1 It is submitted that the assessee has been carrying on the same business in the same setup and under the same facts and circumstances. Even the manner and method of recording the transactions has also been the same since beginning. The same books of account and the other ancillary record showing details maintain…

M/S Raj Auto Wheels P .Ltd., Ajmer vs. JCIT, Range-1, Ajmer

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 397/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocawteFor Respondent: Shri P.R. Meena, C IT-DR

Section 131Section 145(3)Section 194ASection 40

…quasi-judicial authority. He merely proceeded on his own whims 37 ITA NO. 397/JP/2015 RAJ AUTO WHEELS (P) LTD. VS JCIT, RANGE-1, AJMER and fancies. The ld. CIT(A) completely ignored this vital aspect going to the root. Kindly refer Dhakeshwari cotton Mills 26 ITR 775 (SC). Use of words “might” and “appears” support this contention. 2. Settled Past Practice: 2.1 It is submitted that the assessee has been carrying on the same business in the same setup and under the same facts and circumstances. Even the manner and method of recording the transactions has also been the same since beginning. The same books of acc…

ITO-33(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Vikram Baijnath Agarwal, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed and cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 103/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 33(1)(2) V. Shri Vikrambaijnath Agarwal Room No. 945, 9Th Floor 2003/04, Birchwood Raheja Villows Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex Lokhandwala Township Nr Mahindra Gate 4 Kandivali (E), Mumbai - 400101 Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400051 Pan: Adepa8582C Appellant Respondent

Section 142Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…ourt in the case of Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 has held that correctness of accounts books cannot be doubted on suspicion conjectures and surmises. C. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs CIT,(1954) 26 ITR 775 has observe that the A.O is not entitled to make a pure guessand make an assessment without reference to any evidence or any material atall. This proposition has been followed in case of-Raj Mohan Saha& Others vs CIT (1962) 52 ITR 231 - A.K.A.CT.V.CT.AlagappaChettiar& Others vs CIT (1963) 56 ITR 605 D. There must be something more than bare suspic…

Sathian Kumaresan, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

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

ITA 545/CHNY/2021[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 545/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Respondent: Shri. P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

Section 115BSection 69A

…to be set aside. 9. The order of the CIT (Appeals) deserves to be set aside for deviating from binding precedents of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J.J. Enterprises Vs. CIT [ (2002) 254 ITR 216 (SC)] and Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs CIT [ (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC)] wherein the apex court has held that the A.O. is not entitled to make a pure guess and make estimated ad-hoc additions/disallowances to the income returned without reference to any evidence or any material at all. 10. The Learned CIT(A) had erred both in law and on the facts of the case in treating the Cash deposits during Demonetization as…

Sita Devi Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD-4(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 56/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Batwara, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT

Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC’’ JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 56/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sita Devi Agarwal cuke The ITO Vs. A-25, Vivekanand Colony, East Khetri Ward 4(1) House, C.P. Gate, Jaipur- 302 2016 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAUPA 7450 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.M. Batwara, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JC…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Majestic Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5579/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Usita No. 5231/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2005-06 Ita No. 5392/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2006-07 Ita No. 5579/Del/2011 : Asstt. Year 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S Majestic Properties (P) Ltd., Central Circle-2, 1/18B, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm7158E Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Shivani Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 14.10.2022

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Ms. Shivani Singh, CIT DR

Section 132

…e liable to be set aside by this court.” These cases have been followed by several High Courts International Forest Co Vs. CIT 101 ITR 721 (J & K). There must be something more than bare suspicion to support the assessment Dakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs. CIT 26 ITR 775, 82 (SC). Further reliance is placed on following cases that no addition could be made merely on the basis of uncorroborated loose papers: Atul Kumar Jain Vs. DCIT TTJ 064 786 (Del) ACIT Vs. Kirori Lal Aggarwal 50 TTJ 393 (Jab) Kantilal & Bros Vs. ACIT 52 ITD 412 (Pune) ADDI ITO Vs. T. Mudduveerappa Sons 45 ITD 12 (Bang) M. V. Mathew Vs. ITO 46 T…