UmacharanSaha& Bros co. v. CIT

The ACIT, (Central)-1, Indore vs. M/S. Prakash Ashphlting & Toll Highway Ltd., Indore

Appeals are dismissed

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

…-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

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

…-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

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

…-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

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

…-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

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

…-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…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

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

…-11 (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…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

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

…-11 (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…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

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

…-11 (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…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

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

…-11 (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…

ACIT(Central)-1, Indore vs. Shri Punit Agrawal, Mhow

Appeals are dismissed

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

…-11 (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…

ACIT Central-2 Bhopal, Bhopal vs. M/S M Ahuja Project ( India) P Ltd, Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

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

…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). 3.3.3 In view of the above discussion, the ld AO erred in totality in making addition on presumption and surmises and therefore, entire addition made by the AO on th…

The ACIT, (Central)-II, Bhopal vs. M/S. M. Ahuja Project (India) Pvt. Ltd., Raipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

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

…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). 3.3.3 In view of the above discussion, the ld AO erred in totality in making addition on presumption and surmises and therefore, entire addition made by the AO on th…

M/S. M. Ahuja Project (India) Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. The ACIT, (Central)-II, Bhopal

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

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

…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). 3.3.3 In view of the above discussion, the ld AO erred in totality in making addition on presumption and surmises and therefore, entire addition made by the AO on th…

M/S. M. Ahuja Project (India) Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. The ACIT, (Central)-II, Bhopal

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of revenue are dismissed

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

…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). 3.3.3 In view of the above discussion, the ld AO erred in totality in making addition on presumption and surmises and therefore, entire addition made by the AO on th…

ACIT Central-2, Bhopal vs. Shri Sanjeev Agrawal, Bhopal

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniassessment Year: 2012-13 The Acit (Central)-2, Shri Sanjeev Agrawal, Bhopal, Mp-462011 H.No.E-2/134, Arera Colony, Vs. Bhopal, Mp-452016 Pan Adhpa8387N (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit(Dr) For Assessee : Shri S. S. Deshpande, Ca Shri Satyajeet Chatterjee, Ca

…T (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 Dhira Lal Girdharilal v/s CIT (1954) 26 ITR 736 (SC). 4.7.5 In view of the above discussion, material evidences on record and case laws cited, firstly, the loose papers or rather Shri Sanjeev Agrawal Page 21 of 48 sa…

The DCIT Circle -2, Indore vs. M/S Aadya Herbals and Organics, Indore

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

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyaniassessment Year: 2013-14

…I agree with the contention of the appellant that ld A.O. is not justified in making the addition simply on assumption and presumption basis. 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. It would be most pertinent to refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of K P Varghese v/s ITO (1981) 131 ITR 597(SC) wherein it was held that assessee must be shown to have received more than what is disclosed by him as consideration. Burden of p…

The ACIT Central -1, Bhopal vs. Shri Sunil Sahu, Raipur

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

…t apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has ITA No.355/Ind/2020 & Ors. (ACIT vs. Shri Sunil Sahu) A.Y.– 2013-14 & Ors. - 21 - 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). In view of the above discussion, the AO was not justified in making addition on the basis of retracted statement of the appellant. Thus, it can be safely concluded…

Sunil Sahu, Raipur vs. ACIT(Central)-2, Bhopal

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

…t apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has ITA No.355/Ind/2020 & Ors. (ACIT vs. Shri Sunil Sahu) A.Y.– 2013-14 & Ors. - 21 - 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). In view of the above discussion, the AO was not justified in making addition on the basis of retracted statement of the appellant. Thus, it can be safely concluded…

Sunil Sahu, Raipur vs. ACIT(Central)-2, Bhopal

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

…t apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has ITA No.355/Ind/2020 & Ors. (ACIT vs. Shri Sunil Sahu) A.Y.– 2013-14 & Ors. - 21 - 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). In view of the above discussion, the AO was not justified in making addition on the basis of retracted statement of the appellant. Thus, it can be safely concluded…

Sunil Sahu, Raipur vs. ACIT(Central)-2, Bhopal

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

…t apply to income tax proceedings, still assessment cannot be made on the basis of imagination and guess work. It has ITA No.355/Ind/2020 & Ors. (ACIT vs. Shri Sunil Sahu) A.Y.– 2013-14 & Ors. - 21 - 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). In view of the above discussion, the AO was not justified in making addition on the basis of retracted statement of the appellant. Thus, it can be safely concluded…