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 367,518 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

The ITO, Ward-8(2), Ahmedabad vs. Silicon Securities Pvt. Ltd., Pune

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 3017/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3017/Ahd/2014 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Ashok N. KotharyFor Respondent: Shri Anurag Shivastava
Section 144Section 14ASection 68

…rival arguments and find merit in Revenue’s stand in principle. There is hardly any dispute that any evidence filed income tax proceedings has to considered in the light of human probabilities after removing all blinkers as held in Sumati Dayal V/s CIT 1995) 214 ITR 801(SC) and CIT V/s Durgaprasad More (1972) 82 ITR 540 (SC). Their lordships further hold in PCIT V/s. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. LTd. (2019) 412 ITR161 (SC) that an assessee cannot discharge its burden in proving genuineness of such credits merely by filing the corresponding documents. The fact remains that the assessee herein had not produced the invest…

Sajjanraj Jain & Wife (HUF), Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 195/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Sajjan Raj Jain (HUF), Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 194/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Prakash Chand Jain(HUF), Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 192/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Premlata, Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 191/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Anita Jain, Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 190/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Sunita Devi, Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 189/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Sunita Devi, Hyderabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-1 (2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 188/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaappeal In Assessee Department A.Y Ita No 188/Hyd/2022 Smt.Sunita Devi, Hyderabad Acit, Central Circle 2016-17 Pan:Adppd6447C 1(2) Hyderabad 189/Hyd/2022 -Do- -Do- 2017-18 190/Hyd/2022 Smt.Anita Jain, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Abjpj1532C 191/Hyd/2022 Smt.Premalata, Hyderabad -Do- 2016-17 Pan:Acupp5966A 192/Hyd/2022 Sh. Prakash Chand Jain -Do- 2016-17 (Huf) Hyderabad Pan:Aadhp6992D 194/Hyd/2022 Shri Sajjan Raj Jain (Huf) -Do- 2016-17 Hyderabad Pan:Aaghs6338K 195/Hyd/2022 Sh.Sajjanraj Jain & Wife -Do- -Do- (Huf) Hyderabad

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Sri B. Ravinder,DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…a transaction which takes place by way of cheques is invariably sacrosanct. Relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 and in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT reported in (1995) 214 ITR 801, the Assessing Officer held that the apparent must be considered as real until it is shown that there are reasons to believe that the apparent is not real and that taxing authorities are entitled to look into surrounding circumstances to find the reality and the matter has to be considered applying the test of human probabilities. The Assessing O…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kurnool vs. Vasavi Bullion Corporation, Kurnool

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 279/HYD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Ito,Ward-2 V M/S Vasavi Bullion 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhawan S. Corporation N.R.Pet 28/B2, K.S.Complex Opp:Childresn Park Sharoff Bazar, Kurnool-518 001 Kurnool-518 001

For Appellant: Shri Mohan Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 68Section 69Section 69A

…assessee for that previous year if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, not satisfactory as held by Supreme 2 ITA.No.279/Hyd/2019 Count in the cases of Sumati Dayal VS CIT(SC) 214 ITR 801 and Sreelekha Banaerjee & Ors. Vs CIT (SC) 49 ITR 112. 5) Whether the CIT(A) is right in holding that even if bank deficit is not explained by the assessee, it cannot be taxed straightaway unless it is shown that monies were used for earning unaccounted income by entering into undisclosed transactions? 6) Whether the CIT(A) right in deleting the…

Ashwini Ravindra Birole, Pune vs. ITO Ward-6(3), Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 2016/PUN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2015 & 2016/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Ashwini Ravindra Birole, Vs. Ito, Ward-6(3), Pune. 2055, Sadashiv Peth, Anant Residency, 1St Floor, Tilak Road, Pune- 411002. Pan : Afipb3249R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Suhas P. Bora Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: These Assessee’S Twin Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

…ce, she has even failed to place on record either any VAT/sales tax registration as well as the corresponding business place’s details or go-down receipts or any other supportive evidence. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decisions in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1972) 82 ITR 540 (SC) have settled the law long back that any evidence filed in income tax proceedings has to be considered in the light of human probabilities and after removing all blinkers. We apply the very reasoning herein as well to note that apart from claiming herself as a trader in steel items in both…

Ashwini Ravindra Birole, Pune vs. ITO Ward-6(3), Pune

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 2015/PUN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2015 & 2016/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17 Ashwini Ravindra Birole, Vs. Ito, Ward-6(3), Pune. 2055, Sadashiv Peth, Anant Residency, 1St Floor, Tilak Road, Pune- 411002. Pan : Afipb3249R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Suhas P. Bora Revenue By : Shri S. P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: These Assessee’S Twin Appeals

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. BoraFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 69Section 69A

…ce, she has even failed to place on record either any VAT/sales tax registration as well as the corresponding business place’s details or go-down receipts or any other supportive evidence. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decisions in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1972) 82 ITR 540 (SC) have settled the law long back that any evidence filed in income tax proceedings has to be considered in the light of human probabilities and after removing all blinkers. We apply the very reasoning herein as well to note that apart from claiming herself as a trader in steel items in both…

Narasimha Reddy Kotta, Secunderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

ITA 575/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Narasimha Reddy Kotta V Ito,Ward-8(2) Plot No.21 & 22 S. Hyderabad Flat No.302, 2Nd Floor Lahari Residency Shobana Colony West Maredpally Secunderabad-500 026

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Devdas, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthy, Sr.AR
Section 133(6)

…e assessee did not have experience in real estate activities. (o) No development was effected and development agreement was cancelled. (p) The assessing officer relied on the decision in the case of Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540(8C) and 8mt 8umati Dayal v CIT 214 ITR 801 8C to advance the theory of human probability that the version of the assessee is not correct. “ 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR had submitted that despite sufficient opportunity granted to the assessee, the assessee was not able to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of these persons. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and gone thr…

Dnyandeo Laxman Rajale, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Aurangabad

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 80/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.80/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dnyandeo Laxman Rajale, Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Plot No.349, Growth Centre, Aurangabad. Mahanagar-1, Midc, Waluj, Aurangabad- 431136. Pan : Aaqpr2829E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.06.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)- 2, Aurangabad’S Order Dated 29.11.2018 Passed In Case No. Abd/Cit(A)- 2/377/2016-17 Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Heard Both The Parties. Case Files Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Grievance Raised In The Instant Appeal Challenges Correctness Of Both The Lower Authorities’ Action Denying Section 10(38) Long Term Capital Gains’ Exemption Thereby

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…done was to buttress the point that all investments as well as returns had been routed through banking channel after availing the services of registered broker(s) in the stock exchange. The Assessing Officer thereafter referred to Sumati Dayal vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) and CIT vs. Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (SC) to hold that the assessee had derived the impugned bogus long term capital gains after indulging in sham transaction which deserve to be added as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act. All this resulted in the impugned addition of 3 Rs.1,15,53,749/- made in the course of assessment which sta…

DCIT CC 8(1), Mumbai vs. Shri. Suresh Gurubuxsing Wadhwa, Navi Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 78/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: Amol B. Kirtane
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153Section 68

…of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.30,85,00,000/made by 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 ground or principle of preponderance of human possibilities which form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 46,82,000/- and Rs.1,76,36,794/- made by AO on account…

DCIT, CC- 8 (1), Mumbai vs. Surinder Anantram Sabhlok, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 56/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Mani JainFor Respondent: B.K. Bagchi &
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 68

…f the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,38,00,000/- made by 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 ground or principle of preponderance of human possibilities which form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.8,80,800/- and Rs.31,79,189/- made by AO on account of C…

DCIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Jarul Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 3514/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

…erely because the company has suffered long term capital loss it cannot be presumed to be a sham transaction.” 10. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied. He referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs CIT (214 ITR 801)(SC) and CIT vs Durga Prasad More and held that apparent is not true actually, a colourable device and the entire amount is transferred to Indiabulls Power Ltd. as capital receipt. Thereafter, the M/s Jarul Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. AO referred to bond results of Rattan India Power Ltd. and observed as under:- “It is interesting to note that th…

Hariyana Steel Centre (Kdm) Private Limited, Secunderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1151/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.Sunil Goutam, Sr.AR
Section 68

…on 68 is very widely worded and an ITO is not precluded from making an enquiry as to the true nature and source thereof even if the same is credited as receipt of share application money." 5.3 It was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sumati Dayal (214 ITR 801) that in view of section 68 any sum found credited may be charged to income tax if the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source thereof is in the opinion of the Assessing Officer not satisfactory. In such case there is, prima facie, evidence against the assessee viz. the receipt of money and if he fails to rebut the said ev…

Uppal Shah Prop-J K Sugars, Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur

In the result, the cross appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1954/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey &
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

…m, then it could not be said that such a conclusion was unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion no question of law as such could arise.” 10. Reiterating the above position, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) held as under :- “In all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision and if the receipt is in the nature of income, the burden of proving that it is not taxable because it falls within the exemption provided by the Act lies upon the assessee." Thi…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Kolhapur vs. Uppal Jitendra Shah, Kolhapur

In the result, the cross appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1893/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey &
Section 131(1)(d)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 68

…m, then it could not be said that such a conclusion was unreasonable or perverse or based on no evidence. If the conclusion no question of law as such could arise.” 10. Reiterating the above position, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. CIT 214 ITR 801 (SC) held as under :- “In all cases in which a receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the burden lies on the Department to prove that it is within the taxing provision and if the receipt is in the nature of income, the burden of proving that it is not taxable because it falls within the exemption provided by the Act lies upon the assessee." Thi…

The ITO, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Devyani Dharmendra Shah, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 576/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, SR-D.R
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 68

…The genuineness could validly be tested on the ground or principle of preponderance of human probabilities, which could thus form a valid ground or parameter for determining the genuineness, stands since settled by the apex court in Sumati Dayal v. CIT(1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC) wherein the apex court, in declaring the transaction as non-genuine, discarded a host of documentary evidences filed or relied upon by your appellant. That documentary evidences are not by themselves conclusive, and the truth of the matter or the documents could be determined on the basis of or on the anvil of the surrounding facts and circu…