Sumati Dayal v. CIT

214 ITR 801Supreme Court of India1995#12 most cited

What is Sumati Dayal v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue is entitled to look behind the apparent form of a transaction to discover its true nature, applying the test of human probabilities and surrounding circumstances. If transactions defy logic or are unnatural, they can be treated as bogus, even if supported by some documentation, especially in cases of cash credits or unexplained investments.

1,967

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sumati Dayal v CIT · Section 68 · human probabilities · genuineness of transaction · true nature of transaction · accommodation entry · bogus capital gains · penny stock · look behind apparent form · preponderance of probability · colourable device · unexplained loans

Also reported as

80 Taxmann 89125 CTR 124

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 142(1)Section 115BBESection 69CSection 69A
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

price riggingcolourable devicepreponderance of probabilitybogus ltcgpenny stocksection 10(38)entry operatoraddition under section 68addition u/s 68genuineness of the transactionaccommodation entryshare application money

Judgments citing Sumati Dayal v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Ritesh Properties Private Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1705/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 68

…d in law by acting in contravention of the established judicial precedence of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 3 I.T.A. No. 1705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ritesh Properties Pvt. Ltd. 540 (SC) followed in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801: 80 Taxman 89 (SC) by deleting the addition of Rs. 1,39,50,000/-. c) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, through the tax effect in this case below to the monetary threshold limit as laid down CBDT’s Circular NO. 5/2024 dated 15.03.2021, however, the case falls under exceptional clause in para 3.1(h) (cases involving organi…

Srinivas Chemmala, Warangal vs. ITO., Ward-1, Warangal

ITA 164/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Ms.S.Sandhya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Chintagumpula
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…liability of the evidence placed before a court or tribunal. Therefore, the courts and Tribunals have to judge the evidence before them by applying the test of human probabilities". 7.6 Similarly, in a later decision in the case of SumatiDayal v. CIT [(1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC)], Hon'ble Supreme Court rejected the theory that it is for alleger to prove that the 7 Srinivas Chemmala apparent and not real, and observed that, "This, in our opinion, is a superficial approach to the problem. The matter has to be considered in the light of human probabilities........... Similarly the observation .......... that if it is…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 144/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…urn of income. 30. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) amounting to Rs 13,98,37,651/-and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was held that Surrounding circumstances and test of applying human probabilities "Though an apparent must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that the apparent was not real in the case where a party relied on self-serving recitals in document, it was for that party to establish the truth of th…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 143/VIZ/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…urn of income. 30. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) amounting to Rs 13,98,37,651/-and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was held that Surrounding circumstances and test of applying human probabilities "Though an apparent must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that the apparent was not real in the case where a party relied on self-serving recitals in document, it was for that party to establish the truth of th…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 142/VIZ/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…urn of income. 30. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) amounting to Rs 13,98,37,651/-and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was held that Surrounding circumstances and test of applying human probabilities "Though an apparent must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that the apparent was not real in the case where a party relied on self-serving recitals in document, it was for that party to establish the truth of th…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/VIZ/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…urn of income. 30. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) amounting to Rs 13,98,37,651/-and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was held that Surrounding circumstances and test of applying human probabilities "Though an apparent must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that the apparent was not real in the case where a party relied on self-serving recitals in document, it was for that party to establish the truth of th…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/VIZ/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…urn of income. 30. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in allowing relief towards proportionate disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) amounting to Rs 13,98,37,651/-and without applying the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), wherein it was held that Surrounding circumstances and test of applying human probabilities "Though an apparent must be considered real until it was shown that there were reasons to believe that the apparent was not real in the case where a party relied on self-serving recitals in document, it was for that party to establish the truth of th…

Hariom Cold Storage, Dharawara vs. ITO 4(4), Indore

ITA 435/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshihariom Cold Storage, Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Gram Dharawara 4(4), Vs. Dhar Indore (Pan: Aahfh5769G) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee By Shri S.N. Joshi, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13.05.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 253Section 68

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौर"ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Hariom Cold Storage, Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Gram Dharawara 4(4), Vs. Dhar Indore (PAN: AAHFH5769G) (Appellant) (Revenue) Assessee by Shri S.N. Joshi, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 13.05.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brev…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 9 Kolkata vs. P L Goenka HUF

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed and the substantial

ITAT/241/2024HC Calcutta06 May 2025

Bench: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS)

For Appellant: Mr. Tilak Mitra, AdvocateFor Respondent: None
Section 144BSection 147Section 260A

…by group of entry operators and shell entities. Thereafter the assessing officer has taken note of the various decisions, namely, CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540(SC), Sumati Dayal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), applied the test of 9 human probabilities as propounded in the said decisions and then completed the assessment and has pointed out that before finalizing the assessment a final show cause notice was issued on 18.09.2021 for which the assessee submitted reply on 22.09.2021 and the said reply was also considered and the assessing…

Nitin Avantilal Doshi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 20(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1667/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui- Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…eferred appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal confirmed the findings recorded by the Appellate Authority. The Tribunal referred to the decision of CIT v. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC) and also in Simati Doval v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 (SC), to further record on the basis of the facts that the assessee had furnished the details such as copy of ledger account, bank statements, income tax returns, balance sheet etc. It was also recorded that notice under section 133(6) of the Act was issued to the said parties which were duly responded by them. The identity of the parties could n…

Rajasthan Metals, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 28(4), New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 6041/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandraita No. 6041/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 M/S Rajasthan Metals, Vs Income Tax Officer, B-69, Mansarovar Park, Ward-28(4), Delhi-110032 New Delhi-110002 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aapfr7089D Assessee By : Sh. Prince Mohan Sinha, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 05.05.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16, Arises Against The Cit(A)-38, New Delhi’S In Case No. Cit(A), Delhi-38/10073/208-19 Dated 22.03.2019, In Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”)

For Appellant: Sh. Prince Mohan Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…his effect. Be that as it may, we are of the considered view that mere filing of documentary evidence not proving genuineness of the impugned unsecured loans, would not amount to the assessee having discharged it’s onus in light of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 and PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161. More so, when the 3 Rajasthan Metals assessee’s twin partners having equal share had disowned the same before learned departmental authorities. We thus, see no merit in the assessee’s instant and foremost argument which is hereby rejected…

Karuna Jain, Jaipur vs. ITO WD 2(1), Jpr, Jaipur

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 190/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

For Appellant: Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT, Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 139(4)Section 250Section 250(6)

…d the transactions were also unknown to the assessee. All these facts give credence to the unreliability of the entire transaction of shares giving rise to such capital gains. The ratio lay down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT, 214 ITR 801 is squarely applicable to the case. Though the assessee has received the amounts by way of account payee cheques, the transactions cannot be treated as genuine in the presence of the overwhelming evidences put forward by the Revenue. The fact that in spite of earning such steep profits, the assessee never ventured to involve himself in any other…

Pravin Narayan Attarde, Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(1) Jalgaon, Jalgaon

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

ITA 267/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.267/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawdiaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

…se, it is also a fact that there is huge time gap between the date of the cash withdrawn (17.12.2015) and the actual deposit of the cash (16.11.2016). In such circumstances, I would like to rely on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that Sumati Dayal [214 ITR 801 SC) and Durga Prasad More ((1971) 82 ITR 540 SC] to state that the apparent must be considered real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not the real and that the taxing authorities are entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality and the matter has to be considered by applying th…

Sudesh Kumar Sharma, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 2(3), Ghaziabad

ITA 2012/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Urbainia Spaces Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle 13, Flat No.19, Ground Floor, Prop. No. Delhi. 01, Pardhan Complex, Main Road, Mandawali, Delhi-1100 92 Pan :Aabcu6277D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

…uestion was raised on the maintenance of books of account and its accuracy during entire assessment proceedings. The appellant assesee would like draw your attention on judgments of various Hon'ble Courts of law given hereunder:- i. Sumati Dayal V CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 Taxman 89 (SC) ii. Hindustan Tea Trading Company Limited V CIT(2003) 263 ITR 289(Cal HC) ii. iii. Tola Ram Daga V CIT (1966) 59 ITR 632 (Assam) iv. Dhansi Ram Agarwala V CIT (1966) 217 ITR 4 (Gau) v. Khandelwal Constructions V CIT 227 ITR 900(Gau) 5.3.1 I have considered the facts of case and the submissions filed by the appellant. The assessing…

ACIT Central Circle 2 (2), Chennai vs. M/S Midas Golden Distilleries Private Limited, Kanchipuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2562/CHNY/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Apr 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2562/Chny/2017 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasi Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

…having been explained satisfactorily, especially when there is material to show that the transactions were not genuine. 2.4 The Id. CIT(A) ought to have relied on the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sumati Dayal Vs CIT 214 ITR 801(SC) and held that even if identity of the creditor is established, addition can be made if the transactions are not found to be genuine.. 2.5 Having relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lovely Exports luvt Ltd, 319 ITR 005(SC) ought to have taken cognizance of the fact that the said decision was also distinguished b…

Kusum Yadav, Indore vs. ITO 1(2), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 518/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Bagirath Mal Biyani & Sh. Udayan Das Gupta

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 263Section 54BSection 68

…ne Sri. Rajesh Patidar and attributed the receipt as share application money. However, that doesn't absolve the appellant from satisfying the three conditions stipulated under Section 68 of the Act. 13.1. In the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 80 Taxman 89/214 ITR 801 Hon'ble Supreme Court held that: "if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory, there is prima facie evidence against the assessee, vis., the receipt of money, and if he fails to rebut the same, the said evidence being unrebutted can be used against hi…

Shilpa Khandelwal, Bareilly vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Bareilly

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

ITA 313/LKW/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Apr 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Shilpa Khandelwal V. The Dy. Cit-2 330, Kalibari Bareilly Bareilly (U.P) Tan/Pan:Arypk5700A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 27 02 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 04 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 68

…sting entry providers, because in all probability the price of shares do not rise in that proportion, as is claimed by the tax evaders. It is also to be seen that the lower authorities have placed heavy reliance in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in 214 ITR 801 (SC) which underlines the principles of preponderance of probability. It will not be out of place to mention here that the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT vs. Smt. Krishna Devi reported in [2021] 126 taxmann.com 80 (Delhi) has downplayed the principle of preponderance of probability and has held that evidence produced by the asses…

DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Kolkata vs. Lagan Engineering Company Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2165/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…their jamakharchi companies providing bogus accommodation entries. The Ld. Counsel submits that the Ld. CIT(A) did not consider the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More [1971] 82 ITR 540 (SC), Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC). He has also submitted that case of the assessee falls in the exception clause laid down under para 3.1 of CBDT Instruction, so, the tax effect which is no doubt is below the monetary limit has no relevancy. 6. Contrary to that the ld. A.R supports the impugned order thereby submitting that the assessee took interest bearing loan from vario…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Mool Ji Diamonds, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 188/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvcoateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 68

…counted cash in guise of cash sales, which were generated through fictitious sale bills. Thus, on account of the above said facts and circumstances, the Assessing Officer on the basis of such circumstances, relying upon the judgement of 'Durga Parshad Maurya, 214 ITR 80' and 'Sumiti Dayal' as per page 11 and 12 of the assessment order held, that the some benefit of cash in the books of accounts can be given. However, looking at the substantial increase of cash in the year under consideration, as compared to financial year 2015-16, the Assessing Officer, assumed that due to the 'Deepawali season' and other festiva…

Prajita Investments Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2850/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri. Girish Agrawal ()

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68

…IT(A). 5. The CIT(A) upheld the observation of the Ld.AO as the assessee could not comply with the requirements u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal V/s CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801 and CIT Vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 85 ITR 540. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee filed application of all the allottees of the share, signed by the them, PAN of the allottee, ITR computation of total income, P&L account of the allottee, Ban…