Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT

37 ITR 151Supreme Court of India1959#197 most cited

What is Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT authority for?

An income tax assessment or addition cannot be made based solely on suspicion, surmises, or conjectures. The income tax department requires evidence or material to justify an addition, as suspicion, however strong, does not constitute proof.

372

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT · 37 ITR 151 · suspicion not proof · assessment without evidence · no addition on conjecture · surmises and suspicion · sections 143(3) 147 68 · income tax assessment evidence · burden of proof income tax · evidentiary value

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132(4)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 142(1)Section 68

Issues it is cited on

price riggingthird party informationbogus long term capital gaindumb documentsbogus ltcgsection 132(4a)penny stocksection 10(38)rejection of books of accountloose paperslong term capital gainssection 34

Judgments citing Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s.Jayalakshmi Chits

ITTA/211/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd

ITTA/195/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

ITTA/28/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 143(1)(a)

…ve been recorded the same should not have been interfered. (viii) Further reference is made to the decision to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entir…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vip Growth Fund Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5153/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2003-04 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Vip Gorwth Fund Pvt. Ltd. Circle 17(1), New Delhi 208, 4855/24, Ansar Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi – 110 002 (Pan:Aaacv2851M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R.C. Roy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. V.R. Sonbhadra, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

…e. 16. It is settled principle of law that no addition / disallowance can be made on suspicion, surmises and conjectures as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases. a) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT 26 ITR 775 b) Omar Salay Mohammed Sait v CIT 37 ITR 151 c) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. v CIT 26 ITR 775 d) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v CIT 37 ITR 288 17. In the case of Acchyalal Shaw v. ITO (2009) 30 SOT 44 (Kol.) (URO), the Hon'ble ITAT observed as under: 11 "Suspicion cannot replace evidential document. Simple argument or allegation of manipulation is not sufficient without proper evidence." 1…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - VI vs. M/s. Manikanta Iron AND Hardware

ITTA/196/2008HC Telangana02 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sanjay Jain, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee’s are allowed as indicated above

ITA 5325/DEL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm

Section 132Section 153A

…ssing a restraint order which was lifted on 15.05.2007 and search started again, therefore, the order passed by the AO was not belated. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Baroda Distributors P. Ltd. 155 ITR 120 (SC) " Omar Salay Mohmed Sait 37 ITR 151 (SC) " Smt. Krishna Verma Vs ACIT 113 ITD 655 (Del) (SB) 15. In his rejoinder the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is wrong to say that search was temporarily concluded because it continued even when Sh. Sanjay Jain and Sh. Ramesh Sareen fell ill and practically the search was concluded on 22.03.2007 when panchnama was drawn and jewe…

Sh. Sanjay Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee’s are allowed as indicated above

ITA 5024/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm

Section 132Section 153A

…ssing a restraint order which was lifted on 15.05.2007 and search started again, therefore, the order passed by the AO was not belated. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Baroda Distributors P. Ltd. 155 ITR 120 (SC) " Omar Salay Mohmed Sait 37 ITR 151 (SC) " Smt. Krishna Verma Vs ACIT 113 ITD 655 (Del) (SB) 15. In his rejoinder the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is wrong to say that search was temporarily concluded because it continued even when Sh. Sanjay Jain and Sh. Ramesh Sareen fell ill and practically the search was concluded on 22.03.2007 when panchnama was drawn and jewe…

JCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Surya Vinayak Industries Ltd. Amalgamated Company of Amalgamating Company M/S. Rim Zim Valley Products Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee’s are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3170/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm

Section 132Section 153A

…ssing a restraint order which was lifted on 15.05.2007 and search started again, therefore, the order passed by the AO was not belated. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Baroda Distributors P. Ltd. 155 ITR 120 (SC) " Omar Salay Mohmed Sait 37 ITR 151 (SC) " Smt. Krishna Verma Vs ACIT 113 ITD 655 (Del) (SB) 15. In his rejoinder the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is wrong to say that search was temporarily concluded because it continued even when Sh. Sanjay Jain and Sh. Ramesh Sareen fell ill and practically the search was concluded on 22.03.2007 when panchnama was drawn and jewe…

JCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Surya Vinayak Industries Ltd. Amalgamated Company of Amalgamating Company M/S. Rim Zim Valley Products Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee’s are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3167/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm

Section 132Section 153A

…ssing a restraint order which was lifted on 15.05.2007 and search started again, therefore, the order passed by the AO was not belated. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Baroda Distributors P. Ltd. 155 ITR 120 (SC) " Omar Salay Mohmed Sait 37 ITR 151 (SC) " Smt. Krishna Verma Vs ACIT 113 ITD 655 (Del) (SB) 15. In his rejoinder the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is wrong to say that search was temporarily concluded because it continued even when Sh. Sanjay Jain and Sh. Ramesh Sareen fell ill and practically the search was concluded on 22.03.2007 when panchnama was drawn and jewe…

JCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Surya Vinyak Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee’s are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3162/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm

Section 132Section 153A

…ssing a restraint order which was lifted on 15.05.2007 and search started again, therefore, the order passed by the AO was not belated. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Baroda Distributors P. Ltd. 155 ITR 120 (SC) " Omar Salay Mohmed Sait 37 ITR 151 (SC) " Smt. Krishna Verma Vs ACIT 113 ITD 655 (Del) (SB) 15. In his rejoinder the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is wrong to say that search was temporarily concluded because it continued even when Sh. Sanjay Jain and Sh. Ramesh Sareen fell ill and practically the search was concluded on 22.03.2007 when panchnama was drawn and jewe…

JCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Surya Vinyak Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the department are dismissed and the Cross Objections of the assessee’s are allowed as indicated above

ITA 3158/DEL/2011[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. A. T. Varkey, Jm

Section 132Section 153A

…ssing a restraint order which was lifted on 15.05.2007 and search started again, therefore, the order passed by the AO was not belated. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Baroda Distributors P. Ltd. 155 ITR 120 (SC) " Omar Salay Mohmed Sait 37 ITR 151 (SC) " Smt. Krishna Verma Vs ACIT 113 ITD 655 (Del) (SB) 15. In his rejoinder the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that it is wrong to say that search was temporarily concluded because it continued even when Sh. Sanjay Jain and Sh. Ramesh Sareen fell ill and practically the search was concluded on 22.03.2007 when panchnama was drawn and jewe…

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited, (Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/8/2005HC Telangana05 Jul 2012
Section 143(1)(a)

…ve been recorded the same should not have been interfered. (viii) Further reference is made to the decision to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entir…