"No man is ever as anti-feminist as a really feminine woman": A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli noted that income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of the real income of parties in matrimonial disputes: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reiterated that income tax returns (ITR) do not reflect the actual income of a party and cannot be an accurate guide to determine the income of parties in matrimonial cases [Kiran Tomar and ors vs State of Uttar Pradesh].
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli noted that during matrimonial disputes, parties tend to underestimate incomes and, therefore, family courts have to carry out a holistic assessment to determine the real income.
"It is well-settled that income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of the real income. Particularly, when parties are engaged in a matrimonial conflict, there is a tendency to underestimate income. Hence, it is for the Family Court to determine on a holistic assessment of the evidence what would be the real income of the second respondent so as to enable the appellants to live in a condition commensurate with the status to which they were accustomed during the time when they were staying together," the Court said.
A family court had in March this year ordered a husband, the second respondent in the instant case, to pay ₹20,000 per month to his wife and ₹15,000 each to their daughters as maintenance.
The sum was based on a finding that his monthly income was ₹2 lakh.
On a revision petition filed by the husband, the Allahabad High Court noted that his monthly income as per his ITR was ₹37,500.
It, therefore, held that the family court had not indicated how it arrived at the sum of ₹2 lakh per month and set aside that ruling.
This verdict of the High Court came to be assailed before the Supreme Court.
The top court said that the High Court was not justified in setting aside the family court.
It opined that the High Court did not appreciate the reasons that weighed with the family court, which included the fact that the husband had, in his ITR, not included the income from the business he was running with his father.
The High Court ought to have been aware of the parameters of its revisional jurisdiction, the Supreme Court said.
It added that the children's needs have to be duly met.
The bench also noted that the husband had failed to comply with an earlier interim order passed by it in which the top court had directed him to pay the arrears of maintenance.
"Ordinarily, we would have been inclined to pass a coercive order against the second respondent, but, in order to furnish a further opportunity to him to comply, we are passing a conditional order," the Court said.
The Court remanded the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration but made it clear that arrears have to be paid by the end of this year, failing which the husband's revision plea before the High Court will stand dismissed.
Further, regular maintenance will also have to be paid during the course of proceedings before the High Court, the bench directed.
Senior Advocate Ravi Prakash Mehrotra appeared for the appellants. Senior Advocate Priya Hingorani appeared for the husband.
References:
Support Us
Satyagraha was born from the heart of our land, with an undying aim to unveil the true essence of Bharat. It seeks to illuminate the hidden tales of our valiant freedom fighters and the rich chronicles that haven't yet sung their complete melody in the mainstream.
While platforms like NDTV and 'The Wire' effortlessly garner funds under the banner of safeguarding democracy, we at Satyagraha walk a different path. Our strength and resonance come from you. In this journey to weave a stronger Bharat, every little contribution amplifies our voice. Let's come together, contribute as you can, and champion the true spirit of our nation.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| ICICI Bank of Satyaagrah | Razorpay Bank of Satyaagrah | PayPal Bank of Satyaagrah - For International Payments |
If all above doesn't work, then try the LINK below:
Please share the article on other platforms
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text. The website also frequently uses non-commercial images for representational purposes only in line with the article. We are not responsible for the authenticity of such images. If some images have a copyright issue, we request the person/entity to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue.
Related Articles
- "Every sinner has a future": In the labyrinth of justice, where Chandrakant Jha, with 18 murders, finds another chance at parole, it begs the question: Is redemption possible for everyone, or are some paths too dark to ever find the light again
- "Chutiyaram": Delhi’s Trade Marks Registry shockingly approved ‘CHUTIYARAM’ for Sadhna Goswami’s namkeen and biscuits, but later on withdrawing it after two weeks, admitting Balaji’s epic fail let a crude mark dodge Section 9(2)(c), sparking a hearing
- "Finally, in conclusion, let me say just this": Remark against Prophet Mohammad - Supreme Court transfers all FIRs against ex-BJP member Naveen Kumar Jindal to Delhi Police, during the hearing, Luthra sought similar relief as granted in Arnab Goswami case
- Supreme Court crushed Saquib Nachan’s attempt to whitewash ISIS by claiming ‘Caliphate’ and ‘Jihad’ had no terror link, exposing his role in the Mumbai blasts, turning Padgha into a jihadi base, and son Shamil’s IED plot in Pune—terror ran in their blood
- "It is only the cynicism that is born of success that is penetrating and valid": A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petitions challenging the Central government's 2016 decision to demonetise currency notes of ₹1,000 and ₹500
- In another shocker, Supreme Court quotes 'every sinner has a future' and commutes death sentence of Mohd Firoz for rape & murder of 4-year-old girl: Child brutally assaulted, two teeth broken while smothering after rape
- Notice issued to Central govt on plea challenging the constitutional validity of Waqf Act 1995 by Delhi High Court: Ashwini Upadhyay filed the plea that Waqf Act is antithetical to Secularism in India
- In 1990, nurse Sarla Bhat was abducted, tortured, and murdered by JKLF terrorists during the Kashmiri Pandit exodus; now, 35 years later, the SIA has reopened her case, raiding Srinagar hideouts in a long-awaited push for justice and remembrance
- "Man is not what he thinks he is, he is what he hides": Supreme Court rejects plea seeking details of December 12, 2018, Collegium meeting held, "Whatever is discussed shall not be in the public domain. Only final decision required to be uploaded"
- Fifty-six former Supreme and High Court judges denounce the INDIA bloc’s impeachment notice against Justice G.R. Swaminathan, warning that political pressure threatens judicial independence in India
- "Justice delayed is justice denied": Public servant can be held guilty under Prevention of Corruption Act based on circumstantial evidence: Supreme Court, 'mere acceptance of an illegal gratification without anything more would not make it an offence'
- Only Dhimmis can be a good Hindu – An article on Shekhar Gupta’s ThePrint argues ‘defending namaz’
- "गजवा-ए-हिंद": Supreme Court grants bail to Jalaluddin Khan, detained under UAPA for planning an Islamic rule in India by 2047, ironically highlighting in the judicial realm, 'Bail is the rule, jail is the exception,' even in cases of national conspiracy
- Justice Gavai countered to SG Tushar Mehta, "Skies will not fall. What is the alarming urgency? We will hear you", Supreme Court grants interim bail to Teesta Setalvad after 2 urgent Saturday night hearings, stays High Court order to surrender for a week
- “Words have no wings but they can fly a thousand miles“: Justice Ajay Rastogi - "If You decide against the Govt, You will be labeled as an independent judge, if you make a comment against the Govt, everyone including media is happy; this should change"
















