"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
- In a defining moment, India's Supreme Court declined to recognize same-sex marriage rights, placing the onus on Parliament, amidst passionate pleas & dissenting opinions, future of LGBTQ+ unions remains in legislative hands, echoing society's crossroads
- "The weight of 59 lives demands attention": Supreme Court denies bail to three Godhra train case convicts, emphasizing its severity. The 2002 incident claimed 59 lives, including women and children, leading to widespread riots in Gujarat
- "My Shelter Days are over, done, Because you, my master, took me home": Bombay HC imposes fine on citizens feeding strays in public places, "If these so-called friends are really interested in protection and welfare of strays, they must adopt those dogs"
- Calcutta High Court's landmark judgment illuminates the secular essence of Durga Puja, reinforcing citizens' constitutional rights and India's unity in diversity, a celebration beyond religion, it embodies vibrant spirit of communal harmony & tradition
- “The truth about injustice always sounds outrageous”: Supreme Court stays death sentence of M Samivel, who raped a minor girl and fearing that the girl might tell someone about the crime, he smashed her head against a tree and dropped her into a pond
- “Man cannot be freed by the same injustice that enslaved it”: Supreme Court stays Uttarakhand High Court order on Haldwani eviction, and disapproved the manner in which eviction was sought to be carried out by the Indian Railways, urges rehabilitation
- "Unheard of:" Bombay High Court deprecated Maharashtra government for keeping a 21-year-old student Nikhil Bhamre in jail for a social media post that did not even name NCP Chief Sharad Pawar
- “Chaos is merely order waiting to be deciphered”: MoP issue settled; government cannot conveniently cite views of few judges on MoP to oppose Collegium recommendations, scheme of our constitution requires court to be final arbiter of law ~ Supreme Court
- Even the most ruthless criminals who tortured and killed a woman & her parents over 'witchcraft' deserves dignity, says Orissa HC, commuting death sentences to life imprisonment, as courts prioritize reform while justice for the victims fades into silence
- "An error doesn't become a mistake until you refuse to correct it": Supreme Court dismissed a plea seeking the opening of secret rooms of Taj Mahal to put to rest the "alleged history" of monument including claims that it was a Shiva temple, Tejo Mahalaya
- Calcutta Quran Petition: A petition to ban the Quran altogether was filed 36 years ago, even before Waseem Rizvi petitioned for removing 26 verses from Quran
- "Spirit of truth and the spirit of freedom-they are the pillars of society": Social media today has become a powerful medium for exchange of views, expressing opinions and thus has become important pillars on which our democracy stands: Bombay High Court
- Prophet Muhammad row: 'Call in central forces if State police unable to control situation', says Calcutta High Court to West Bengal Govt, petition mentioned that police was standing as mute spectator while BJP party offices were being burnt
- "Devotional songs of a Christian Yesudas rendered on Hindu Gods without any demur in temples": Madras High Court plays nosy-parker with Hindu faith stating that non-Hindus cannot be prevented entry into temple if he has faith in that Hindu deity
- "प्यार तूने क्या किया": In Kolkata, 36-year-old divorcee Sanghati Paul stabs 30-year-old Sarthak Das, her live-in partner, multiple times, Das treated her son as his own, Paul confessed to the crime, igniting a city-wide debate on hidden feminism dangers