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 367,368 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

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur vs. M/S Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 169/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur vs. M/S Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 168/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur vs. M/S Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 167/JODH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 144/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 143/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 142/JODH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 141/JODH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 140/JODH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Udaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 139/JODH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153A

…ting the addition of Rs. 1,60,28,120/- made on account of discount allowed on this bills of patients for treatment. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human probability as laid down by Hon’ble SC in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) & CIT v. Durga Prasad More (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC). 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case for the assessment year under consideration the ld. CIT(A) is justified in Law in deleting the addition of Rs. 30,02,385/- made on account of suppression of x-ray receipts. The Ld. CIT(A) ignored the principle of preponderance of human pro…

Dheerajsingh Omprakashsingh Mohnia, Mumbai vs. ITO, Int Tax Ward 3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3280/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Dheerajsingh Income Tax Officer, Omprakashsingh Mohnia, Int Tax Ward 3(2)(1), Room No.1627, 16Th Floor, C/O. Vaish Associates, 106, Peninsula Centre, Vs. Air India Building, Dr. S.S. Rao Road, Nariman Point, Parel, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 012 Pan: Amvpm6622M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Soni, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Suresh D. Gaikwad, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 69A

…eriod of 44 months; that there is no evidence on record brought by the assessee if any efforts were made to purchase the property during the period of four years and relied upon the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Simit Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 and the circular dated October 21, 2021 qua purchase of immovable property by non resident of individual. 14. When we examine the contentions raised by the Ld. Authorised Representatives of the parties to the appeal in the light of the undisputed facts that “the assessee being a NRI, worked in USA earned salary which was offered to tax in USA an…

Girdhari Lal Meena, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 118/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Gogra (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) a
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144(1)

…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". 6.9 Similarly, in a later decision in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [(1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC)]. Hon'ble Supreme Court rejected the theory that it is for alleger to prove that the 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 alleged that these ticke…

D.Senthil Kumar, Chennai vs. ACIT, Coimbatore

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

ITA 1210/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1210/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri D. Senthil Kumar, The Acit, No.25, Rathinasabapathy Street, Vs. Circle-Ii, Co-Operative A Colony, Coimbatore. K.K. Pudur, Coimbatore – 641 038. Pan: Ajups 1904Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…axing authorities are entitled to look into the surrounding circumstances to find out the reality and the matter has to be considered by applying the test of human probabilities. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT, (1955) 214 ITR 801, has reiterated the same principle. Hence in the present case considering the surrounding circumstances and human probabilities, we are of the view that on-money paid by assessee and admitted in sworn statement u/s.133(6) of the Act that this amount of Rs.1,55,40,000/- is on-money payment and paid at the time of registration of sale deed. Even th…

E-Ally Consulting (India) Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1230/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Jayant R. Bhatt, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153CSection 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. ITA No. 1230/Mum/2023 (A.Y.2013-14) E-Ally Equities (India) Pvt. Ltd., A-1701/1702, Lotus Corporate Park, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400 063 ...... Appellant Vs. DCIT CC-1(1), Pratistha Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 PAN – AAJCA1196P ..... Respondent & 2. ITA No. 1231/Mum/2023 (A.Y.2013-14) E-Ally Commodities (India) Pvt. Ltd., A-1701/1702, Lotus Corporate Park, Goregaon (E), Mumbai-400 063 ...... Appellant Vs. DCIT CC-1(1), Pratistha Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 0…

Apl Metals Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(3), Kolkata

ITA 297/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm I.T.A. No.297/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2018-19 Apl Metals Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, National C/O, Subash Agarwal & Faceless Assessment Centre, Associates, Advocates, Siddha Delhi. Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- 700069. (Pan: Aacca4246P) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69C

…at creditor had funds on the date of advancing the loan even if the amounts received by cheque and return of income has been filed. 208 ITR 465 (Cal) Precision Finance Which has held that mere furnishing of particulars is not enough, Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (SC) 214 ITR 801 In this case, it is held that even though the share applicants could not be accessed through notices, assessee should prove the genuineness of the transaction as they were accessible to it. CIT Vs MAF Academy Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi) In this case, it is held that mere production of incorporation details, PAN Nos or the fact that third persons or compani…

Bhawna Computers LLP (Converted From Bhawna Computers Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC-7(3), Mumbai

ITA 6402/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the Learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,49,50,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) has held genuineness could validity be tested on the Page 2 of 36 ground or principle of preponderance of human possibilities which form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness.‖ 3. Assessee in ITA no. 6402/Mum/2019 on the following grounds:- 1. On facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed u/s. 14…

Bhawana Computers LLP (Converted From Bhawna Computers Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbau vs. DCIT - CC 7 (3), Mumbai

ITA 6401/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the Learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,49,50,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) has held genuineness could validity be tested on the Page 2 of 36 ground or principle of preponderance of human possibilities which form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness.‖ 3. Assessee in ITA no. 6402/Mum/2019 on the following grounds:- 1. On facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed u/s. 14…

DCIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Bhawna Computers LLP, Mumbai

ITA 6127/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the Learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,49,50,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) has held genuineness could validity be tested on the Page 2 of 36 ground or principle of preponderance of human possibilities which form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness.‖ 3. Assessee in ITA no. 6402/Mum/2019 on the following grounds:- 1. On facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed u/s. 14…

DCIT -CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Bhawna Computer Private Limted, Mumbai

ITA 6126/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi& Shri Rahul Choudhary

For Appellant: CA Rushabh MehtaFor Respondent: Samuel Pitta, Sr. AR
Section 142Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…the Learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,49,50,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) has held genuineness could validity be tested on the Page 2 of 36 ground or principle of preponderance of human possibilities which form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness.‖ 3. Assessee in ITA no. 6402/Mum/2019 on the following grounds:- 1. On facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed u/s. 14…

M/S. Layog Properties Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 753/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year 2012-13 M/S. Layog Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito N-18, First Floor, Ward-15(2) Malviya Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 017 Pan Aabcl9997R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133(6)Section 234BSection 68

…be added as Income. This has been the consistent judicial interpretation of section 68 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Govindaraju Mudaliyar (34 ITR 807), Kale Khan Mohd. Hanif (50 ITR 1), Devi Prasad Biswanath Prasad (72 ITR 194), Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801) and so on. The Supreme Court in the case of P. Mohana Kala (291 ITR 278) explains the meaning of the expression 'the assessee offers no explanation' appearing in section 68 to mean that the assessee offers no proper, reasonable and acceptable explanation. It was held that the opinion of the AO for not accepting the explanation offered is require…

Encord Refri Cool Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-8(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1737/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271

…source of alleged sum which the assessee miserably failed to prove by filing necessary documents. Ld. AO accordingly, applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in 82 ITR 540 and Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in 214 ITR 801 came to a conclusion that the book value of the assessee is approximately Rs. 200/- but it has charged the shares a high premium of Rs. 990/- which is beyond human probability. Thereafter, ld. AO applying the decisions and judicial pronouncements mentioned in the assessment order held that the assessee failed to discharge its burden to explain th…