Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (0.25 seconds)The Coinage Act, 2011
Section 5 in The Bankers Books Evidence Act, 1891 [Entire Act]
Deputy Commissioner Of Incom Tax vs M/S Pushpak Merchants Pvt. Ltd. Vandana ... on 21 March, 2018
21. We find that neither the AO nor the ld.CIT(A) has rejected the books of
account maintained by the assessee by invoking the provisions of section
:-14-: ITA. No.4013/Chny/2025
145(3) of the Act. In the absence of rejection of books and without disproving
the quantitative records maintained by the assessee, the sales entered in the
regular books cannot be selectively treated as non-genuine merely on the basis
of suspicion or surrounding circumstances. The AO proceeded mainly on the
premise that the assessee could not have effected such huge volume of sales
within a short period of time immediately after the announcement of
demonetisation on 08.11.2016 and therefore invoked the theory of human
probabilities by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in CIT v. Sumati Dayal. However, the theory of human probabilities cannot be
applied in isolation disregarding direct documentary evidences available on
record. The assessee has placed contemporaneous evidences including
newspaper reports and business records demonstrating extraordinary rush in
jewellery shops across Chennai immediately after the demonetisation
announcement. The abnormal surge in jewellery purchases during the relevant
period is a matter of public knowledge and therefore the mere quantum of sales
cannot by itself lead to the conclusion that the transactions were fictitious.