UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT

37 ITR 21Supreme Court of India1959#2289 most cited

What is UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT authority for?

Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof or evidence in income-tax proceedings. Additions cannot be made solely based on suspicion, placing the onus of proof on the Assessing Officer, especially for additions under 'deeming fiction' provisions.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Umacharan Saha & Bros co. v. CIT · 37 ITR 21 · suspicion cannot be proof · onus of proof income tax · evidence in assessment proceedings · section 69 additions · section 143(3) assessment · assessment based on conjecture · burden of proof on AO · deeming fiction proof · unexplained cash payment · property transaction value

Sections most often in play

Section 139Section 131(1)(d)Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69Section 115BBESection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

buyback of sharesonus of proofsection 269tsection 2(43)section 158bbsection 134section 269ssection 271esection 271aab(1a)section 158basection 158b(b)section 2(31)

Judgments citing UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT

ASHISH BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 875/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vinok Kumar Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT
Section 115BSection 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 68

…he fact. Therefore, the Ld. AO has failed to discharge his onus of proof, especially when addition has been made under “deeming fiction”. 4. It would be pertinent to refer to the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros Co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) wherein it was held that suspicion, however, strong cannot take place of proof. 5. Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd v/s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, LIC BUILDING vs. MADHU CHORDIA, C-SCHEME

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1525/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…O (1981) 131 ITR 597(SC), burden of proof was on the AO. The appellant has rightly contended that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take place of proof by taking reference of the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros Co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC). In view of the above totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the ratio of the judgements referred by the appellant in her submissions, the addition made in the assessment order considering the property transaction value as mentioned in the soft files to be the final/actual transaction value and treating the differe…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, LIC BUILDING vs. MADHU CHORDIA, C-SCHEME

In the result the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1520/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132(1)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 69

…O (1981) 131 ITR 597(SC), burden of proof was on the AO. The appellant has rightly contended that suspicion howsoever strong cannot take place of proof by taking reference of the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros Co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC). In view of the above totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the ratio of the judgements referred by the appellant in her submissions, the addition made in the assessment order considering the property transaction value as mentioned in the soft files to be the final/actual transaction value and treating the differe…

M/S SHRIGOPAL RAMESHKUMAR SALES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

…ome tax proceedings, assessment cannot be made based on imagination and guesswork. The substantive and normal rule of evidence applies together with the principle of natural justice. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 21 (SC), the Court held that suspicion, however strong cannot take the place of evidence. In the case of Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT [1956] 30 ITR 181 (SC) the Court held that, when an affidavit is filed the averment therein is assumed to be correct unless the same is proved otherwise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chellaram v. C…

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 119/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…[1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of Evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros. Co. v/s CIT, 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. 102. Further, we find that the assessment made under section 143(3) for the A.Y. 2020–21 by making 40% gross profit estimation on extrapolation of unaccounted sale of coal dust, books of account has not been rejected and section 145(3) has not been applied, no assessment has been m…

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 117/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…[1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of Evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros. Co. v/s CIT, 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. 102. Further, we find that the assessment made under section 143(3) for the A.Y. 2020–21 by making 40% gross profit estimation on extrapolation of unaccounted sale of coal dust, books of account has not been rejected and section 145(3) has not been applied, no assessment has been m…

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 116/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…[1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of Evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros. Co. v/s CIT, 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. 102. Further, we find that the assessment made under section 143(3) for the A.Y. 2020–21 by making 40% gross profit estimation on extrapolation of unaccounted sale of coal dust, books of account has not been rejected and section 145(3) has not been applied, no assessment has been m…

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD.,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 115/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…[1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of Evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros. Co. v/s CIT, 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. 102. Further, we find that the assessment made under section 143(3) for the A.Y. 2020–21 by making 40% gross profit estimation on extrapolation of unaccounted sale of coal dust, books of account has not been rejected and section 145(3) has not been applied, no assessment has been m…

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 114/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…[1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of Evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros. Co. v/s CIT, 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. 102. Further, we find that the assessment made under section 143(3) for the A.Y. 2020–21 by making 40% gross profit estimation on extrapolation of unaccounted sale of coal dust, books of account has not been rejected and section 145(3) has not been applied, no assessment has been m…

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

ITA 113/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 68

…[1954] 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of Evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros. Co. v/s CIT, 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. 102. Further, we find that the assessment made under section 143(3) for the A.Y. 2020–21 by making 40% gross profit estimation on extrapolation of unaccounted sale of coal dust, books of account has not been rejected and section 145(3) has not been applied, no assessment has been m…

DCIT CENTRAL, BHOPAL vs. SHARAD SHARMA, BHOPAL

ITA 309/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No. 29/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2010-11) It(Ss)A No. 32/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2015-16) Shri Sharad Sharma, Acit, Central, बनाम/ H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior Vs. 74 Bunglows, (Stationed At Bhopal) Tt Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Amzps9791D) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v/s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 3.3.8 In view of the above discussion, material evidences on record and case laws cited, firstly, the loose papers or rather say it as dumb document should be a spe…

DCIT CENTRAL, BHOPAL vs. SHARAD SHARMA, BHOPAL

ITA 304/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniit(Ss)A No. 29/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2010-11) It(Ss)A No. 32/Ind/2023 (Ay: 2015-16) Shri Sharad Sharma, Acit, Central, बनाम/ H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior Vs. 74 Bunglows, (Stationed At Bhopal) Tt Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Amzps9791D) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…IT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of Umacharan Saha & Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v/s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 3.3.8 In view of the above discussion, material evidences on record and case laws cited, firstly, the loose papers or rather say it as dumb document should be a spe…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 805/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 804/IND/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 803/IND/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 802/IND/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 801/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 800/IND/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 799/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

THE ACIT, (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE vs. M/S. PRAKASH ASHPHLTING & TOLL HIGHWAY LTD., INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 798/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 269SSection 271DSection 271E

…-16 (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) has held that although strict rules of evidence Act do not apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has been held in the case of UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v/s CIT 37 ITR 21 (SC) that suspicion, however strong cannot take place of evidence. Similar views have been expressed by Apex court in the case of Dhiraj Lal Girdharilal v / s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.2.9 Despite the request of the Appellant, during the course of Assessment proceeding and also during the course of Penalty proceedings, the department despite ha…

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3

UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT (37 ITR 21) — Cited in 50 Judgments | BharatTax