Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1984 (7) TMI 18 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        High Court upholds Tribunal's decision in favor of assessee, emphasizing need for evidence-backed findings. -based The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, against the Revenue, holding that the Tribunal's conclusion was not perverse and was supported by material ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                          High Court upholds Tribunal's decision in favor of assessee, emphasizing need for evidence-backed findings. -based

                          The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, against the Revenue, holding that the Tribunal's conclusion was not perverse and was supported by material evidence. The Court emphasized that findings of fact can only be interfered with if they are perverse, based on no evidence, or contradictory to the evidence. The Tribunal's decision to delete the additional investment estimation of Rs. 90,000 was upheld, considering the availability of funds from previous years' additions.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Discrepancy in the stock account of rice and paddy.
                          2. Investment in undeclared stock.
                          3. Habitual transactions outside the books.
                          4. Reasonableness of additional investment estimation.
                          5. Availability of funds from previous years' additions.
                          6. Tribunal's findings on investment and additions.
                          7. Legal principles regarding findings of fact and their perversity.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Discrepancy in the Stock Account of Rice and Paddy:
                          The Income-tax Officer (ITO) discovered discrepancies in the stock account during the assessment year 1961-62. The opening stock and production of rice up to March 1960 were recorded as 5,041 maunds, while total sales were 5,267 maunds, showing an excess of 226 maunds. This discrepancy indicated transactions outside the books and unaccounted purchases.

                          2. Investment in Undeclared Stock:
                          The ITO concluded that the assessee had not disclosed the purchase of 4,500 maunds of paddy, corroborated by unaccounted sales of 226 maunds of rice. The investment in undeclared paddy was estimated at Rs. 66,420, and further investment after March was calculated, totaling Rs. 90,000. An additional profit of Rs. 10,000 was also estimated in the rice milling account.

                          3. Habitual Transactions Outside the Books:
                          The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) confirmed the ITO's findings, noting that the assessee habitually conducted business outside the books of account. The AAC upheld the estimate of Rs. 90,000 for unaccounted investment and the additional profit of Rs. 10,000.

                          4. Reasonableness of Additional Investment Estimation:
                          On further appeal, the Tribunal accepted the discrepancy in stocks but questioned the reasonableness of the additional Rs. 90,000 investment estimation. The Tribunal found that the transactions outside the books amounted to Rs. 66,420, and previous years' additions should have been considered available for investment in the current year.

                          5. Availability of Funds from Previous Years' Additions:
                          The Tribunal noted that additions totaling over Rs. 90,000 had been made in the preceding two years, indicating that funds were available for the current year's investment. The Tribunal concluded that the additional investment in March was covered by these previous additions, leading to the deletion of the Rs. 90,000 addition.

                          6. Tribunal's Findings on Investment and Additions:
                          The Tribunal's findings were based on the material on record, and it held that the additional investment estimate over Rs. 66,420 was unsupported by evidence. The Tribunal also considered that the assessee had funds from previous years' additions, amounting to Rs. 92,000, which were available for investment.

                          7. Legal Principles Regarding Findings of Fact and Their Perversity:
                          The High Court emphasized that findings of fact by the Tribunal can only be interfered with if they are perverse, based on no evidence, or contradictory to the evidence. The Court found that the Tribunal's conclusions were based on the material on record and did not involve conjectures or surmises. The Court referenced several cases, including CIT v. Jain and Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. v. CIT, to support its decision that the Tribunal's findings were not perverse.

                          Conclusion:
                          The High Court answered the referred question in the negative, holding that the Tribunal's conclusion was not perverse and was based on material evidence. The question was resolved in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, with no order as to costs.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found