← All Phrases

“evidentiary value”

Natural JusticeEvidenceEvidence5,387 judgments

The decision most relied on for evidentiary value is Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT (125 ITR 713), cited in 962 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on evidentiary value

Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT
125 ITR 713 · 1980 · Supreme Court
962
citing judgments

Adverse material or evidence collected by the Assessing Officer behind the assessee's back, without providing it to the assessee or affording an opportunity for cross-examination, has no evidentiary value and cannot be relied upon to make additions.

Pullangode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala
91 ITR 18 · 1973 · Supreme Court
666
citing judgments

Admissions, whether made through entries in account books or statements, are important pieces of evidence but are not conclusive. An assessee has the right to demonstrate that an admission made by them is incorrect or can be retracted.

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son
352 ITR 480 · 2013 · Supreme Court
581
citing judgments

Statements recorded during a survey under Section 133A do not have evidentiary value as Section 133A does not empower examination on oath. Consequently, additions to income cannot be made solely based on such uncorroborated statements without other credible evidence.

Society v. UOI
394 ITR 220 · 2017 · Supreme Court
493
citing judgments

Uncorroborated loose papers or documents found during a search operation have no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for determining undisclosed income. Additions based on such material require independent evidence to establish trustworthiness and a direct link to the assessee.

CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son
300 ITR 157 · 2008 · High Court
452
citing judgments

A statement recorded under duress during a survey, if subsequently retracted, has no evidentiary value and cannot be the sole basis for an income-tax assessment; the assessment should instead rely on audited accounts.

CBI v. V.C. Shukla
3 SCC 410 · 1998 · Supreme Court
442
citing judgments

Loose sheets of paper, excel sheets, or diaries, often referred to as 'dumb documents,' are wholly irrelevant as evidence and not admissible under Section 34 of the Evidence Act if they lack evidentiary value. Additions to income cannot be made solely based on such documents without corroborating, reliable, and admissible evidence supported by other circumstances.

Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. CIT
37 ITR 151 · 1959 · Supreme Court
372
citing judgments

An income tax assessment or addition cannot be made based solely on suspicion, surmises, or conjectures. The income tax department requires evidence or material to justify an addition, as suspicion, however strong, does not constitute proof.

CIT v. R. Nalini Devi ITTA 232 of 2013 (A. P)
294 ITR 49 · 2007 · Supreme Court
299
citing judgments

Additions to income cannot be made solely based on uncorroborated third-party statements, documents, or loose sheets seized during a search, and such evidence requires the assessee to be provided with an opportunity for cross-examination.

Judgments citing evidentiary value

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Appu Food Products, Cuddalore Chennai

ITA 667/CHNY/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 663, 664 & 667/Chny/2023 & Co Nos.: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 &2019-20 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Appu Food Products, Tax, V. K-1, Sidco Industrial Estates, Central Circle 2(1), Vadalur, Cuddalore – 607 303. Room No. B3, Ground Floor, [Pan: Aabfa-1499-G] Investigation Building, Chennai – 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 132

failed to appreciate that matching of bank entries with the entries of excel sheets clearly proved beyond doubt that the seized excel sheets have evidentiary value and transaction narrated therein had :-3-: ITA. Nos: 663, 664 & 667/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 actually happened regardless of bank or cash transactions ... 667/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 holding that, the excel sheets found in the possession of third party did not have evidentiary value, since they were not found in the premises of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that, no corroborative evidence like cash receipts, unaccounted purchase bills

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S. Appu Direct Pvt. Ltd., Cuddalore

ITA 666/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 665 & 666/Chny/2023 & Co Nos.: 37 & 38/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Appu Direct Pvt Ltd., Tax, V. S.No. 544/4A, 4B Opposite To Central Circle 2(1), National College, Kumbakonam, Room No. B3, Ground Floor, Panruti, Cuddalore – 607 103. Investigation Building, [Pan: Aawcs-9382-A] Chennai – 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 132

failed to appreciate that matching of bank entries with the entries of excel sheets clearly proved beyond doubt that the seized excel sheets have evidentiary value and transaction narrated therein had actually happened regardless of bank or cash transactions. Hence the assessing officer rightly relied on excel sheets for making ... deleted additions made u/s. 69A of the Act by holding that, the excel sheets found in the possession of third party did not have evidentiary value, since they were not found in the premises of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that, no corroborative evidence like cash receipts

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S. Appu Direct Pvt. Ltd., Cuddalore

ITA 665/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 665 & 666/Chny/2023 & Co Nos.: 37 & 38/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Appu Direct Pvt Ltd., Tax, V. S.No. 544/4A, 4B Opposite To Central Circle 2(1), National College, Kumbakonam, Room No. B3, Ground Floor, Panruti, Cuddalore – 607 103. Investigation Building, [Pan: Aawcs-9382-A] Chennai – 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 132

failed to appreciate that matching of bank entries with the entries of excel sheets clearly proved beyond doubt that the seized excel sheets have evidentiary value and transaction narrated therein had actually happened regardless of bank or cash transactions. Hence the assessing officer rightly relied on excel sheets for making ... deleted additions made u/s. 69A of the Act by holding that, the excel sheets found in the possession of third party did not have evidentiary value, since they were not found in the premises of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that, no corroborative evidence like cash receipts

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Appu Food Products, Cuddalore Chennai

ITA 664/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 663, 664 & 667/Chny/2023 & Co Nos.: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 &2019-20 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Appu Food Products, Tax, V. K-1, Sidco Industrial Estates, Central Circle 2(1), Vadalur, Cuddalore – 607 303. Room No. B3, Ground Floor, [Pan: Aabfa-1499-G] Investigation Building, Chennai – 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 132

failed to appreciate that matching of bank entries with the entries of excel sheets clearly proved beyond doubt that the seized excel sheets have evidentiary value and transaction narrated therein had :-3-: ITA. Nos: 663, 664 & 667/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 actually happened regardless of bank or cash transactions ... 667/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 holding that, the excel sheets found in the possession of third party did not have evidentiary value, since they were not found in the premises of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that, no corroborative evidence like cash receipts, unaccounted purchase bills

DCIT Central Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. M/S Appu Food Products, Cuddalore Chennai

ITA 663/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.: 663, 664 & 667/Chny/2023 & Co Nos.: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 &2019-20 Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Appu Food Products, Tax, V. K-1, Sidco Industrial Estates, Central Circle 2(1), Vadalur, Cuddalore – 607 303. Room No. B3, Ground Floor, [Pan: Aabfa-1499-G] Investigation Building, Chennai – 34. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Cit Respondent/Cross Objector By : Shri. M. V. Prasad, Ca सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, CIT
Section 132

failed to appreciate that matching of bank entries with the entries of excel sheets clearly proved beyond doubt that the seized excel sheets have evidentiary value and transaction narrated therein had :-3-: ITA. Nos: 663, 664 & 667/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 actually happened regardless of bank or cash transactions ... 667/Chny/2023 & CO Nos: 30, 31 & 32/Chny/2023 holding that, the excel sheets found in the possession of third party did not have evidentiary value, since they were not found in the premises of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) further observed that, no corroborative evidence like cash receipts, unaccounted purchase bills