← All Phrases

“human probabilities”

Judicial DoctrinesSection 68Section 682,056 judgments

The decision most relied on for human probabilities is Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801), cited in 1,967 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on human probabilities

Sumati Dayal v. CIT
214 ITR 801 · 1995 · Supreme Court
1,967
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Durga Prasad More
82 ITR 540 · 1971 · Supreme Court
1,579
citing judgments

Tax authorities must judge evidence using the test of human probabilities and consider the apparent as real until there are reasons to believe it is not. They can rely on circumstantial evidence and the preponderance of probabilities to determine the genuineness of transactions.

PCIT v. Swati Bajaj
139 Taxmann.com 352 · 2022 · High Court
443
citing judgments

Tax authorities are entitled to examine surrounding circumstances and apply the test of human probabilities to determine the genuineness of long-term capital gains arising from the sale of manipulated penny stock, even if prima facie documents appear to support the transaction.

Nemi Chand Kothari v. CIT
330 ITR 1 · 2011 · Supreme Court
73
citing judgments

An appellate order is perverse and unsustainable if it deletes an addition made under Section 40A(3) of the Income-tax Act by admitting additional evidence without providing the Assessing Officer an opportunity to examine or rebut it, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

PCIT v. NDR Promoters Ltd.
410 ITR 379 · 2019 · High Court
70
citing judgments

The assessee has the onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of share capital and share premium subscribers under Section 68; merely providing documentation is insufficient if transactions are found to be sham, justifying additions.

CIT v. Sree Meenakshi Mills Rs. 73.5
63 ITR 609 · 1967 · Supreme Court
59
citing judgments

The tax authorities can look beyond the legal form of a transaction and disregard the corporate entity if it is used for tax evasion or to create a smoke screen. The assessee bears the burden of proving the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of transactions, and the true nature of a transaction is determined based on surrounding circumstances and human probabilities, not requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt.

426 (Rajasthan) 14. Woodword Governors India v. CIT
253 ITR 745 · 2002 · High Court
45
citing judgments

Reasonable cause, in the context of human action, is defined as a probable cause that would compel an ordinarily prudent person, acting on an honest and reasonably grounded belief, to conclude their action was appropriate.

Balbir Chand Maini v. CIT
12 Taxmann.com 276 · 2011 · High Court
45
citing judgments

When an assessee fails to establish the genuineness of long-term capital gain from share transactions, especially when share prices are artificially inflated, the sale proceeds can be added as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The 'human probability test' is a valid tool to assess the veracity of such transactions.

Judgments citing human probabilities

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. SHIKHA INDRAKUMAR AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 239/NAG/2023[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 merely on the basis of general reports of the Investigation Wing or on the theory of human probabilities. The Tribunal further held that in the absence of any direct evidence linking the assessee with alleged price manipulation or accommodation entries, the addition ... brokers to be present for oral cross examination. The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by noting that circumstantial factors and human probabilities clearly indicates that the assessee indulged in taking accommodation entries through sale of shares to uphold the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissal of appeal

DCIT-CC-2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. INDRAKUMAR GHISULAL AGRAWAL, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 220/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69C

unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act, merely on the basis of general reports of the Investigation Wing or on the theory of human probabilities. The Tribunal further held that in absence of any direct evidence linking the assessee with alleged price manipulation or accommodation (Indrakumar Ghisulal Agrawal) entries ... brokers to be present for oral cross examination. The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by noting that circumstantial factors and human probabilities clearly indicates that the assessee indulged in taking accommodation entries through sale of shares to uphold the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissal of appeal

BHAWNA KAPOOR,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-62(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 632/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarsmt. Bhawna Kapoor Vs. Acit Prop M/S Manish Circle 62(1) Handicraft 1196, Main Delhi Bazar, Paharganj, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adxpk 3853 F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ramesh Chander, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69A

investor who has entered in investment fray to make quick profit. Even the Assessing Officer has applied the presumptions and concept of human probabilities to make the additions without their being any material against the assessee. We observe that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case ... Revenue to establish that the investment made in such companies was an accommodation entry. Thus the Court should take the aspect of human probabilities into consideration that no prudent investor would invest in penny scrips. Considering the fact that the financials of these companies do not support the gains made

GYAN PRAKASH GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-10(4), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6271/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlate Gyan Prakash Gupta Vs. Ito Through Legal Heir Raj Ward 10(4) Kumari Gupta New Delhi Plot No.6 & 7, Defence Enclave, Laxmi Nagar, East Delhi 110092 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Adupg 2697 N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ajit Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

submitted that the Revenue authorities have made the addition u/s 68 of the Act invoking the principle of human probabilities and suspicious surrounding only and on the basis of weak financials of these companies, SEBI Proceedings, Investigation wing, Kolkata, report and statement of Shri Sumit Kumar, the director ... investor who has entered in investment fray to make quick profit. Even the Assessing Officer has applied the presumptions and concept of human probabilities to make the additions without their being any material against the assessee. We observe that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case

KAMILU ABOOBACKER KALATHINGAL,MUBMAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD 26(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7772/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Kamilu Aboobacker Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward- Kalathingal 26(2)(1), Mumbai . Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 403/404, B-12, Ankur Chs Kurla Complex, Mumbai- Ltd, Kalpak Estate, Kane 400051 Nagar, Mumbai-400037 Pan: Aaepk5562H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohan Despande, Adv. Department By Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing 23.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.04.2026

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 57Section 68

receipt of the sale proceeds in 2011 and their deposit in financial year 2013-14 rendered the explanation inherently improbable on the touchstone of human probabilities, especially considering the profile of the assessee as a director of a company and the normal banking environment. As regards the claim of wedding

INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. SAKSHI SAGGAR, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 219/RPR/2026[2019]Status: HeardITAT Raipur02 Apr 2026

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.219/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 The Income Tax Officer, Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 68Section 69C

additions made were therefore based solely on generalized suspicion regarding the nature of the scrips and on the application of the theory of human probabilities, without any supporting evidence establishing the appellant's involvement in the alleged scheme.” Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC relied on various case laws

VINAY CHAUDHARY,PITAMPURA vs. ACIT INT TAX 1(2)(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 3115/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Apr 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: “Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 54Section 54FSection 69A

Vinay Chaudhary companies. The assessee has merely reiterated that the transactions were made through banking channels. As per assessment orders, it was beyond human probabilities as to why 10 different Kolkata based entities were holding the shares of a company like M/s. Gemini Merchandise Private Limited. The reliance ... assessee in M/s. Gemini Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. and the subsequent capital gains made in these shares do not satisfy the test of human probabilities. The transaction was therefore, held to be bogus, non-genuine and accordingly sum of Rs. 4,14,06,000/- was declared as capital gain for sale

DCIT, CIRCLE- 19(1), DELHI vs. PASHUPATI ROAD CARRIER PVT. LTD., DELHI

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

ITA 2490/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumardcit, Circle 19(1), Vs. Pashupati Road Carrier Delhi Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 221, 2Nd Floor, Plot No. 70A/47, Ground C.R. Building, Floor, Moti Nagar, I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 110 002 Rama Road Indl. Area, New Delhi – 110 045 (Pan: Aadcp8319H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Baldev Raj, Ca & Sh. Manish Upneja, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 24.02.2026 Date Of Order : 20.03.2026 O R D E R Per Sudhir Kumar, Jm :

For Appellant: Sh. Baldev Raj, CA & Sh. Manish UpnejaFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 68

evidence placed before a court or tribunal. Therefore, the Courts and Tribunals have to judge the evidence before them by applying the test of human probabilities". 7.8 Similarly, in a later decision in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [(1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC)], Hon'ble Supreme Court rejected ... observed that, "This, in our opinion, is a superficial approach to the problem. The matter has to be considered in the light of human probabilities.....Similarly the observation .. .that if it is alleged that these tickets were obtained through fraudulent means, it is upon the alleger to prove that

VANEET AGGARWAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-14(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 2607/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 69ASection 69C

returns from other forms of investments and the IPO issued by the company was found to be fraudulent. 4.2 By applying the test of human probabilities and various case laws, the Ld. AO proceeded to making an addition u/s 69A of the Act to the extent ... straight case of tax planning to gain benefit of long-term capital gains. The earnings @ 491% over a period of 5 months is beyond human probability and defies business logic of any business enterprise dealing with share transactions. The net worth of the company la not known to the assessee

JAGJIWAN SINGH,KHABBE DOGRAN TARN TARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD TARN TARAN

In the result, both the additions are deleted and the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 653/ASR/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 Mar 2026AY 2010-2011

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kalia, C. A
Section 143(3)Section 250

deponents were available for cross-examination but no such exercise has been done. As such, we are of the opinion that “preponderous of human probabilities” are 13. in favour of the assessee and, we are also of the opinion that the source of cash deposited by the assessee

NARAYANLAL BHANAJI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 588/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Pallavi, CIT-DR & Shri Rameshwar P
Section 115BSection 132Section 153CSection 68

real. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sumati Dayal vs. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC) has held that the test of human probabilities can be applied to determine the genuineness of a transaction. 15. Applying the above principles to the facts of the present case, it is evident

SEENAIAH BODDUPALLI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1168/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: him which are proper documents and crucial evidence for disposing the appeal in favour of the appellant.

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 250

received advance of Rs.1,00,00,000/- from certain persons for sale of agricultural land. In our considered view, going by the theory of human probabilities, the initial argument of the assessee that, he was carrying the cash at the direction of his employer seems to be probable because

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SANGHVI DHANRUPJI DEVAJI & CO., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 6015/MUM/2025[AAQFS6338H]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Hon’Ble Shri Bijayananda Prusethdeputy Commissioner Of Vs. Sanghvi Dhanrupji Income Tax Central Circle Devaji & Co. 5(3), Mumbai 33, Mumba Devi Road, Room No. 426, 4Th Floor, Dagina Bazar, Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai- 400002 Mumbai- 400051 Pan/Gir No. Aaqfs6338H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri M B Sanghvi Revenue By Ms. Kavitha Kaushik,Sr.Dr. Date Of Hearing 21.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Challenging The Impugned Order Dated 23.12.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. Ground I - Whether On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting/Allowing Relief In Respect Of The Addition Of Rs.

Section 250Section 40A(3)(a)Section 68

erred in deleting the addition made by AO without appreciating the fact that Applying the ratio in 2 the "Theory of Human Probability", no prudent person will hold such Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) in hand in large number in his possession and deposit the same into the bank account ... Prasad More (82 ITR 540), wherein it has been held that apparent facts cannot be accepted as conclusive if they defy the test of human probabilities? 4. Ground IV - Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition

ITO 19.3.1, MUMBAI vs. VARUN JAISINGH ASHER, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 8251/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Girish Agrawalito -19(3)(1), Mumbai Varun Jaisingh Asher Room No.405, 4Th Floor, Piramal Arkade Rise, 17Th Floor, 31-A, Vs. Chambers, Lower Parel Mumbai Carmichael Road, Cumballa Hills, 400012 Mumbai 400026 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aiapa1791N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri. Sushil Shengde, SR DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 56(2)(x)

establish genuine tenancy. The AO relied on Sumati Dayal v. CIT and McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO to apply the “test of human probabilities” and strike down what he considered a tax avoidance scheme. The AO also argued that the flat received by the assessee in the redeveloped building

VEERESH WALI ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 2413/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Siva Prasad Reddy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate – Standing
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 69A

assessee was not in a position to satisfactorily explain the source of the said cash deposits in a manner consistent with the test of human probabilities. 9.5 The learned CIT(A) further observed that the assessee failed to establish the necessity for making withdrawals through bearer cheques when sufficient cash ... case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (824 ITR 540), wherein it was held that the apparent must be considered in the light of human probabilities and that fanciful explanations can be disregarded, the learned CIT(A) held that the assessee’s explanation in respect

ITO (INT TAXN)-1, HYDERABAD vs. SRINIVAS RAO DONTINENI, MEDAK

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

ITA 1821/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1821/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Income Tax Officer Vs. Srinivas Rao Dontineni, (International Taxation)-1, Medak. Hyderabad. Pan: Aztpd7575K (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 01/Hyd/2026 (In आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1821/Hyd/2025) (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Income Tax Officer Vs. Srinivas Rao Dontineni, (International Taxation)-1, Medak. Hyderabad. Pan: Aztpd7575K (Appellant In Appeal) (Respondent/Cross Objector) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Sudarshan, Ca Shri Srinivas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri Sv Siva Prasad, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 02/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 04/03/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals)-10, Hyderabad, Dated 19.08.2025, Co No.01/Hyd/2026 Ito (It)-1, Hyd Vs. Srinivas Rao Dontineni

For Appellant: Shri Sudarshan, CAFor Respondent: Shri SV Siva Prasad, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

erred in accepting the sources of cash deposits as earlier cash withdrawals by relying on cash flow statements without applying the test of human probabilities as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Durga Prasad More ... income earned in India or income which had escaped assessment. In fact, the addition appears to have been made by the AO based on human probabilities rather than concrete material disproving the veracity of the assessee’s explanation. CO No.01/Hyd/2026 ITO (IT)-1, Hyd vs. Srinivas Rao Dontineni 16. Ostensibly

NADARAJAN KALYANI,TIRUCHENGODE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, ERODE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2898/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

Section 144Section 69Section 69A

assesssee’s assertion that she kept ₹22,48,834/- in her hands for more than six (6) months, which is suspicious and against human probabilities. Therefore, the AO disbelieved the assessee’s claim of the nature & source of ₹22,48,834/- and made an addition of the same as unexplained

M/S BHAGIRATH DAIRY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGAUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NAGAUR

The appeal is allowed

ITA 755/JODH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 44Section 68Section 69Section 69A

bank account. In the view of the Learned Assessing Officer, keeping cash of Rs. 25 lacs at home for a long time was against human probabilities. The Learned CIT(A) has just upheld the action of the Learned Assessing Officer. Conclusion It is submitted that both the Learned Assessing Officer

RACHNA DIPESH LADDHA,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(2) VADODARA GUJARAT, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1922/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69A

Supreme Court in PCIT v. NRA Iron & Steel (P) Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161 (SC). Similarly, the surrounding circumstances and human probabilities are Rachna Dipesh Laddha vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 7– relevant in examining the explanation of the assessee, as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

JERMELS ACCADEMY,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), EXEMP,, SILIGURI

In the result, all the 3 appeals filed by the Assessee are partly

ITA 2748/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Feb 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 12A(1)(ba)Section 12A(2)Section 139Section 144Section 2(15)Section 250

rendered in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT (214 ITR 801 (SC)], wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the test of human probabilities must be applied, and fanciful or uncorroborated explanations cannot be accepted. Applying these principles, I hold that the AO was justified in concluding that