Genuineness of gift depends on proof by assessee; factual findings on evidence created no question of law.

The assessee bore the burden of proving the genuineness of the gift, but failed to discharge it because the donor was not produced and no denial of opportunity to produce the donor or seek summons was shown. The Tribunal's conclusion that the gift explanation was unacceptable was based on appreciation of evidence and factual findings. As the issue turned on facts rather than any legal error or statutory interpretation, no question of law arose from the Tribunal's view treating the amount as income, and the addition was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee discharged the burden of proving the genuineness of the gift and whether the Tribunal's finding treating the amount as income gave rise to any question of law.

Analysis: The onus to establish the validity of the gift lay on the assessee. The donor was not produced, and no case was made that an opportunity to do so had been denied or that summons had been sought and refused. The Tribunal's conclusion was based on appreciation of evidence and on its finding that the gift story was not acceptable. Such a conclusion turns on facts, not on any legal error.

Conclusion: No question of law arose from the Tribunal's finding; the addition was upheld.

---