{"id":51976,"date":"2025-03-18T11:35:46","date_gmt":"2025-03-18T06:05:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/vijay-kumar-jain-v-ito-2024114-itr-20-sndelhitrib\/"},"modified":"2025-03-18T11:35:46","modified_gmt":"2025-03-18T06:05:46","slug":"vijay-kumar-jain-v-ito-2024114-itr-20-sndelhitrib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/vijay-kumar-jain-v-ito-2024114-itr-20-sndelhitrib\/","title":{"rendered":"Vijay Kumar Jain v. ITO (2024)114 ITR 20 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Held that the books of account is not\u00a0 rejected. Payments for purchases were\u00a0 made through banking channel with customs duty.\u00a0 Cash sales\u00a0 are backed by corresponding purchases, reduction in stock and declaration of profits on sales. Addition is deleted. Additional ground is admitted. The Tribunal also held that suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot take the place of proof. The powers given to the Revenue authority, howsoever wide, do not entitle him to make the assessment on pure guess without reference to any evidence or material. The assessment cannot be framed only on bare suspicion. The assessment should rest on principles of law avoiding any presumption of evasion. Followed, Umacharan Shaw and Bros. v. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC)\u00a0 and Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) \u00a0(AY.2017-18)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash deposits-Demonetisation period-Books of account not rejected-Addition cannot be made on suspicion, conjectures-Additional ground is admitted.[S.115BBE, 143(3),ITATR. 11]  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-51976","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-dwk","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51976","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=51976"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51976\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":51977,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51976\/revisions\/51977"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51976"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51976"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51976"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}