Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

27 ITR 126Supreme Court of India1955#1446 most cited

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

The Assessing Officer is not bound by the technical rules of evidence and pleadings and is entitled to act on material that may not be admissible as evidence in a court of law during assessment proceedings.

79

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT · 27 ITR 126 · Assessing Officer powers · technical rules of evidence · assessment proceedings · material for assessment · evidence admissibility · Section 143(3) · Section 147 · Section 153A

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT

Ram Kumar Gupta, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 43, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 309/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.309/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ram Kumar Gupta…...…………….....……………………....………....Appellant 67/46, Posta Chowrasta, Kolkata -700007. [Pan: Adrpg8556B] Vs. Acit, Circle-43, Kolkata…...................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Rajiva Kumar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit- Dr On Behalf Of P. P. Barman, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 09, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Confirmation Of Addition Of Rs.1,10,46,000/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Cash Deposits In The Bank Account Of The Assessee During Demonetization Period. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Derives Income From Retail Trading In The Name Of M/S R. Kumar & Co. The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 28.07.2017 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.8,19,420/-. The Return Was Selected For Scrutiny & Notices U/S

Section 250Section 44ASection 68

…slight, is on the Income-tax authorities not on the assessee - Banshidhar Onkarmall Vs CIT (1953) 23 ITR 353 (Ori). “It is certainly not a leap in the dark. The Assessing Officer is not entitled to make a guess without evidence" CIT Vs Kameshwar Singh, (1933) 1 ITR 94 (PC); Seth Nathuram Munnalal Vs CIT (1954) 25 ITR 216 (Nag). 1.19 Further, an assessment based on mere conjecture, surmise' or suspicion or irrelevant and inadmissible evidence and material is invalid and unsustainable in law. Reliance, for this proposition, is placed on the orders in the cases of Dhirajlal Giridharilal Vs CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC)…