Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO

130 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1981#378 most cited

What is Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

A mere charge of bogus expenses, without a specific finding that the assessee failed to disclose material facts, is insufficient to justify reassessment beyond four years under the first proviso to Section 147. Courts can examine the materiality and relevance of facts forming the 'reason to believe' for initiating reassessment, ensuring it is based on reasonable grounds.

234

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO · Section 147 · Section 148 · first proviso to section 147 · reason to believe · income escaping assessment · material facts disclosure · bogus expenses · reassessment beyond four years · judicial review of reasons

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 151Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 133ASection 144

Issues it is cited on

true and full disclosurefirst proviso to section 147material facts necessary for assessmentsection 148(2)kelvinatorlive linkmere change of opinionfresh tangible materialsection 151(1)sanctioning authoritybeyond four yearsincome escaping assessment

Judgments citing Ganga Saran and Sons P. Ltd. v. ITO

M/S Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4), Mysore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1765/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…hu Kalamma Trust. "reason to believe is not the same thing as reason to suspect. The Apex court reiterated its view expressed in the case of Sheo Nath Singh v AAC, 82 ITR 147". [iv] The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ganga Saran and Sons Pvt Ltd vs ITO and Others [130 ITR 1] has reiterated that : "It is well settled as a result of several decisions of this court that two distinct conditions must be satisfied before. the Income-tax Officer can assume jurisdiction to issue notice under s. 147(a). First, he must have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment and, secondly, he must have rea…

M/S Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust, Mysore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4), Mysore

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1761/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…hu Kalamma Trust. "reason to believe is not the same thing as reason to suspect. The Apex court reiterated its view expressed in the case of Sheo Nath Singh v AAC, 82 ITR 147". [iv] The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ganga Saran and Sons Pvt Ltd vs ITO and Others [130 ITR 1] has reiterated that : "It is well settled as a result of several decisions of this court that two distinct conditions must be satisfied before. the Income-tax Officer can assume jurisdiction to issue notice under s. 147(a). First, he must have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment and, secondly, he must have rea…

Manju Devi Agarwal, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1773/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1771/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Gopal Prasad Agarwal Vs Income-Tax Officer, Wd-46(1), Kolkata (Pan: Aczpa8061E) Appellant Respondent

Section 147

…In that case the reasons recorded by the AO were totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and transactions and the persons with whom the transaction had taken place. It is also taken note that in Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the expression “reason to believe” occurring in section 147 is “stronger” than the expression “is satisfied” and from the discussions made above, I am of the considered opinion that such requirement under the law has not been made in the reasons recorded in the instant case to reopen the assessment and, ther…

Payal Agarwal, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1772/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1771/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Gopal Prasad Agarwal Vs Income-Tax Officer, Wd-46(1), Kolkata (Pan: Aczpa8061E) Appellant Respondent

Section 147

…In that case the reasons recorded by the AO were totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and transactions and the persons with whom the transaction had taken place. It is also taken note that in Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the expression “reason to believe” occurring in section 147 is “stronger” than the expression “is satisfied” and from the discussions made above, I am of the considered opinion that such requirement under the law has not been made in the reasons recorded in the instant case to reopen the assessment and, ther…

Gopal Prasad Agarwal, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward - 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 1771/KOL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] I.T.A. No. 1771/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Gopal Prasad Agarwal Vs Income-Tax Officer, Wd-46(1), Kolkata (Pan: Aczpa8061E) Appellant Respondent

Section 147

…In that case the reasons recorded by the AO were totally silent with regard to the amount and nature of bogus entries and transactions and the persons with whom the transaction had taken place. It is also taken note that in Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the expression “reason to believe” occurring in section 147 is “stronger” than the expression “is satisfied” and from the discussions made above, I am of the considered opinion that such requirement under the law has not been made in the reasons recorded in the instant case to reopen the assessment and, ther…

Shri Jasbir Singh, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-I (2), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 426/ASR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.426/Asr/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12)

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass, DR
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

…ment Year: 2011-12 Shri Jasbir Singh. information there must be some reason warrant holding the belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It has to be kept in mind that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ganga Saran & Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) held that the expression “reason to believe” occurring in Section 147 “is stronger” than the expression “if satisfied” and such requirement has to be met by the AO in the reasons recorded before usurping the jurisdiction u/s. 147 of the Act. It must be kept in mind that information adverse against the assessee may trigger “reason to suspect” t…

Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1231/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1231/Kol/2017 (िनधा"रणवष"S / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri S. M. Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…. Even if there is foundation based on information there must be some reason warrant holding the belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It has to be kept in mind that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ganga Saran & Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) held that the expression “reason to believe” occurring in sec. 147 “is stronger” than the expression “if satisfied” and such requirement has to be met by the AO in the reasons recorded before usurping the jurisdiction u/s. 11 Budhiya Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2008-09 147 of the Act. It must be kept in mind that information adverse ag…

M/S. Mono Orion Food India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 2001/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…a rational and intelligible nexus is to be found between the material and the reason recorded for the purpose of re-opening of assessment. The Supreme Court in the cases of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in 103 ITR 437 (SC) and Ganga Saran & Sons vs. ITO 130 ITR 1 (SC) held as follows: “a) Income Tax-officer vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 (SC): “As stated earlier, the reasons for the formation of the belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to th…

M/S. Mono Orion Food India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 2000/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Godara]

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…a rational and intelligible nexus is to be found between the material and the reason recorded for the purpose of re-opening of assessment. The Supreme Court in the cases of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in 103 ITR 437 (SC) and Ganga Saran & Sons vs. ITO 130 ITR 1 (SC) held as follows: “a) Income Tax-officer vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 ITR 437 (SC): “As stated earlier, the reasons for the formation of the belief must have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the belief Rational connection postulates that there must be a direct nexus or live link between the material coming to th…

Divya Secfin Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 538/KOL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri A.L.Saini, Am]

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…O has prima-facie “reasons to suspect”. Thereafter, he is bound to make/conduct reasonable enquiry and collect material, which could make him belief that there is in fact an escapement of income. We note that Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ganga Vs. ITO reported in 130 ITR 1 (SC) has held that expression “reasons to believe” as occurring in section 147 is stronger than expression “satisfy” and such requirement need to be met when the validity of the reasons are tested. The reasons recorded by the AO to invoke reopening u/s. 147 when challenged for want of jurisdiction, then it has to be evaluated on a stand- alone basi…

Huron Builders Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 6(1), New Delhi

In the result the appeal is allowed on this preliminary

ITA 6251/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Garg, Adv. & Shri AkarshFor Respondent: Ms. Sugandha Sharma, Sr.D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 68

…s decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court, like; Sheonath Singh vs. Appellate Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (1971) 82 ITR 147; ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das reported in (1976) 1043 ITR 437; and Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO reported in (1981) 130 ITR 1, held as under: - “Thus, it is well settled that the “reason to believe” under section 147 must be held in good faith and should have a rational connection and relevant bearing on the formation of the belief and should not be extraneous or irrelevant. Further, this court in proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution of India can scrutinize…

Mansukhbhai Dayalbhai Patel, Surat vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Cen. Circle-2, Surat

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

ITA 1780/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O. P. Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.1780/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Mansukhbhai Dayalbhai V. Assistant Commissioner Of Patel,(Sheta), Income Tax, Central 10 Shantiniketan Row House, Circle-2, Surat Anand Mahal Road Adajan, Surat. [Pan: Abcpp 1275 F] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"व क" ओर से Revenue By Shri Sriniwas T. Bidari, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई क" तारीख Date Of Hearing 26.07.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख Date Of 27.08.2019 Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…fore, Mansukhbhai D Patel v. ACIT-2, Surat /I.T.A. No.1780/AHD/2016/A.Y.2011-12 Page 12 of 21 reopening of assessment is not valid in the eyes of law, for which the learned Counsel has placed reliance in the case of Ganga Saran & Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [1981]130 ITR 1 (SC) and ITO & Ors v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) ITO & Ors v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC) wherein it was held that the powers of ITO to reopen the assessment, though wide, are not plenary. The words of statute are “reason to believe” and not “reason to suspect”. The learned Counsel further submitted that there was no…

M/S Manish Finlease (P) Ltd, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Patna

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…` IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PATNA BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna PAN/GIR No.AACCM 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARs Revenue by : Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR Date of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Patna dated 27.9.2018 for the assessment year 2010-2…

M/S Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 25/JPR/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 Jul 2019AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri PC Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…lief that there has been escapement of the income of the assessee from assessment in the particular year because of his failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts." (Emphasis Supplied) 9. In the matter of Ganga Saran & Sons (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1/6 Taxman 14 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:— "6. It is well settled as a result of several decisions of this Court that two distinct conditions must be satisfied before the Income Tax Officer can assume jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 147(a). First, he must have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped…

Sri Udit Kumar Dugar, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 799/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…. Even if there is foundation based on information there must be some reason warrant holding the belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. It has to be kept in mind that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ganga Saran & Sons P. Ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC) held that the expression “reason to believe” occurring in sec. 147 “is stronger” than the expression “if satisfied” and such requirement has to be met by the AO in the reasons recorded before usurping the jurisdiction u/s. 147 of the Act. It must be kept in mind that information adverse against the assessee may trigger “reason to suspect” then…

Hightech Construction P.Ltdr, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, both the Appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 1606/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: SH. KAPIL GOEL, ADVFor Respondent: SH. AMIT KATOCH, SR. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…se and those considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437." 6.3 The view taken by the Supreme Court in Lakhmani Mewal Das (supra) was followed in Ganga Saran and Sons Private Limited versus Income-Tax Officer-I, [1981] 130 ITR 1 (SC). The matter was again examined by the Supreme Court in Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another versus Income-Tax Officer and Another, [1993] (203) ITR 456 (SC). In the said case, information was received by the Assessing Officer that the third company had never actually advanced loans to any person and the said third company was in the business co…

Hightech Construction P.Ltdr, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Faridabad

In the result, both the Appeals of the assessee are partly

ITA 1605/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: SH. KAPIL GOEL, ADVFor Respondent: SH. AMIT KATOCH, SR. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…se and those considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437." 6.3 The view taken by the Supreme Court in Lakhmani Mewal Das (supra) was followed in Ganga Saran and Sons Private Limited versus Income-Tax Officer-I, [1981] 130 ITR 1 (SC). The matter was again examined by the Supreme Court in Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another versus Income-Tax Officer and Another, [1993] (203) ITR 456 (SC). In the said case, information was received by the Assessing Officer that the third company had never actually advanced loans to any person and the said third company was in the business co…

Shri Jitendra Kumar Gupta, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bharatpur

In the result, the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and for the assessment year 2012-13 is allowed

ITA 947/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

…lief that there has been escapement of the income of the assessee from assessment in the particular year because of his failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts." (Emphasis Supplied) 9. In the matter of Ganga Saran & Sons (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1/6 Taxman 14 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:— "6. It is well settled as a result of several decisions of this Court that two distinct conditions must be satisfied before the Income Tax Officer can assume jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 147(a). First, he must have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped…

Shri Jitendra Kumar Gupta, Bharatpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bharatpur

In the result, the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and for the assessment year 2012-13 is allowed

ITA 946/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (ACIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 40A(3)

…lief that there has been escapement of the income of the assessee from assessment in the particular year because of his failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts." (Emphasis Supplied) 9. In the matter of Ganga Saran & Sons (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1981] 130 ITR 1/6 Taxman 14 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:— "6. It is well settled as a result of several decisions of this Court that two distinct conditions must be satisfied before the Income Tax Officer can assume jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 147(a). First, he must have reason to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped…

Bhopal Singh Shekhawat, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 656/JPR/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Jan 2019AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 244ASection 251Section 45Section 48(2)

…g Officer should be as to escapement of income and it should not be a product of imagination or speculation. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gangasharan & Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC). Hence, the ld AR has contended that the belief must be of an honest and reasonable person based upon the reasonable grounds. The belief must be based on direct or circumstantial evidence but must not be based on mere suspicion, gossip or rumor. The ld AR has thus pointed out that in the case of assessee, the Assessing Officer has not follo…