Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT

37 ITR 271Supreme Court of India1959#112 most cited

What is Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT authority for?

An income tax assessment or addition cannot be sustained solely on the basis of suspicion, surmises, or conjectures, as strong suspicion does not amount to proof. The revenue authorities must rely on concrete evidence and material to frame an assessment.

567

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,416 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT · suspicion not proof · no addition on surmises · conjectures and suspicion · burden of proof income tax · Section 68 cash credits · Section 132(4) statement · assessment without evidence · Section 37(1) business expenditure · genuineness of transaction

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT

Gajshkati Agrotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1506/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1506/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Gajshakti Agrotech Pvt. बिधम/ Ito, Ward-7(1)(1) Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ground Floor, 414, Empire Churchgate, Mumbai- Business Centre Empire 400020. Industries Ltd. Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Maharashtra- 400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcg4838J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By: Shri Yogendra T Wakare (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 26.03.2023 For Ay. 2012- 13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.99,73,650/- On Account Of Speculation Profit Made By The Ao. 3. Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Company Was Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Agro Products & Other Commodities. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.09.2012 Declaring Loss Of Rs.2,85,374/-. Later, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny. & The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Claimed Carry Forward Of Speculation Loss Of Rs.2,85,374/-. The Ao Asked The Assessee About The Details Of The Commodity Transaction Vide Order Sheet Noting Dated 13.01.2015. The Ao Notes That The Assessee Submitted Ledger Account Of Speculation Loss Wherein It Was Found

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Yogendra T Wakare (Sr. DR)
Section 133(6)

…f surmises and conjectures has concluded that the transaction to be in-genuine and submitted that suspicion cannot take the place of proof. And in this regard cited the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Omacharan Shaw & Bros. Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC). And therefore, according to the Ld. AR, the addition based on surmises and conjectures should be deleted. And for such a preposition inter-alia relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Coronation Agro Industries Vs. DCIT 97 CCH 372 and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Gyandeep Khemka (Income Tax Appeal N…