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 366,005 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

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 132Section 132(4)Section 147Section 68Section 148Section 153ASection 69C

Issues it is cited on

price riggingdumb documentssection 132(4a)statement under section 132(4)bogus long term capital gainsection 292cretracted statementloose paperson-moneybogus ltcgsection 132(4)penny stock

Judgments citing Umacharan Shaw & Bros. v. CIT

Shri Pradeep Singh, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 996/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. CS Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & ShFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(2)(e)Section 2(22)(e)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

…vidence without prejudice, no adverse findings could have been recorded by the authorities based on mere suspicion. It is settled law that, no addition can be made on the basis of surmises, suspicion and conjectures. Reliance for this proposition is placed on 37 ITR 271 (SC) Uma Charan Shaw & Bros. Co. v. CIT. It has been further held in the following cases that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take the place of proof: i) 26 ITR 775 (SC) at 782 (SC) Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 'As regards the second contention, we are in entire agreement with the learned Solicitor General when he says that the ITO is no…

Rajesh J Thakkar, Mumbai vs. DCIT 13(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA N0

ITA 2808/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2808/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Mr. Rajesh J. Thakkar, The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ 407, Saiya House, Of Income Tax – 13(3), V. Narsi Natha Street, Room No. 427, 279, Bhat Bazar, Aaykar Bhavan, Masjid, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 009. Mumbai – 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaapt1856B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, Sr. D.R
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ence, no adverse inference was called for on account of agricultural income. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.P. Varghese v. ITO, 131 ITA 2808/Mum/2014 5 ITR 597 (SC), in the case of Umarchand Shah & Bros v. CIT 37 ITR 271 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Md. Umer v. CIT 101 ITR 525 (Pat.). The assessee also submitted that on the one hand the A.O. has considered the income as unexplained income of the assessee, on the other hand while making disallowance u/s 14A, the A.O. stated that the disallowance is justified as the assessee has…

ITO 14(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Takhtmal Bhuralal Pichholiya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4526/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta Nos. 4526 To 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12 The Ito-14(1)(3), Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal बनाम/ Earnest House, Pichholiya, Vs. Nariman Point, (Prop. Metal Agencies), Mumbai-400 021 Room No. 28, 2Nd Floor, 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002 C.O. Nos. 212 To 214/Mum/2015 (Arising Out Of I.Ta Nos. 4526 To 4528/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years:2009-10 To 2011-12 Shri Takhtmal Bhuralal The Ito-14(1)(3), बनाम/ Pichholiya, Earnest House, Vs. (Prop. Metal Agencies), Nariman Point, Room No. 28, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai-400 021 204, Chandra Mahal, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai-400 002

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punamiya
Section 143(3)

…l Bhuralal Pichholiya 5.4 I find that the AO cannot make any addition just on the basis of presumption. Suspicion, however strong cannot take place of proof. This principle is reflected in the following Judicial pronouncements: Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT (37 ITR 271) (SC) Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills v. CIT (26 ITR 775) (SC) SheoNarain DuliChand v. CIT (72 ITR 766)(AIl.) The appearance of a purchase party on the website of Sales Tax Department may raise a question mark; however the allowance of purchase expenses has to be necessarily decided taking into view the totality of the circumstances of appellant’s claim.…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi vs. Sudhir Budhraja

ITA/59/2003HC Delhi13 Oct 2015

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

For Appellant: Mr Dileep Shivpuri, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent: Dr Rakesh Gupta with Ms Poonam Ahuja
Section 133ASection 260ASection 44ASection 68

…Apart from doubting and questioning the material produced by the Assessee, the AO had not produced any positive evidence which could lead to the inference that the amount received by the Assessee was not gift. 19. In Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT: (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC), the Income Tax Officer did not consider the firm in question as being genuine and rejected the Assessee’s claim for registration of the said firm. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the decision of the ITO and rejected the Assessee’s appeal. Assessee’s further appeal to the Tribunal met the same fate. The Supreme Court set asid…

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Sudhir Budhraja

ITA-59/2003HC Delhi13 Oct 2015
For Appellant: Mr Dileep Shivpuri, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent: Dr Rakesh Gupta with Ms Poonam Ahuja
Section 133ASection 260ASection 44ASection 68

…Apart from doubting and questioning the material produced by the Assessee, the AO had not produced any positive evidence which could lead to the inference that the amount received by the Assessee was not gift. 19. In Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT: (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC), the Income Tax Officer did not consider the firm in question as being genuine and rejected the Assessee’s claim for registration of the said firm. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the decision of the ITO and rejected the Assessee’s appeal. Assessee’s further appeal to the Tribunal met the same fate. The Supreme Court set asid…

Commissioner of Income Tax –V vs. Kapil Nagpal

ITA/609/2014HC Delhi11 Sept 2015
Section 143Section 260Section 271Section 54Section 54F

…ITA 609/2014 Page 1 of 15 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: August 24, 2015 Date of decision: September 11, 2015 11. + ITA 609/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –V ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Senior Standing counsel with Mr. Nitin Gulati, Advocate. versus KAPIL NAGPAL ..... Respondent Through: Dr. Rakesh Gupta with Ms. Poonam Ahuja and Mr. Rohit Kumar Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU…

Commissioner of Income Tax - V vs. M/s. sirveen Control systems

ITTA/15/2012HC Telangana24 Jul 2013
Section 173Section 342

…ed merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures. The enunciation of law on this point is traceable to the series of decisions rendered by the Apex Court. Hon‟ble Supreme Court in “Umacharan Shaw & Bros. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax”, reported as 1959 37 ITR 271 SC has made the following observation :- “20.Taking into consideration the entire circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that there was no material on which the Income- tax Officer could come to the conclusion that the firm was not genuine. There are many surmises and conjectures, and the…