Conclusions based on suspicion cannot take the place of proof : SC

Umacharan Shaw & Bros v. CIT: (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC)– there was no material on which the Income-tax Officer could come to the conclusion that the firm was not genuine and further observed that the conclusion is the result of suspicion which cannot take the place of proof in these matters. In the present case too, the AO had rejected the evidence produced and based his conclusion only on surmises; there was hardly any material for him to conclude that the amount

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.