Section 68 cash credits: factual findings on genuineness and discharge of onus will stand absent perversity.

Where an assessee discharges the burden under section 68 on the genuineness and source of cash credits, the factual finding will not be interfered with in reference jurisdiction unless perversity is shown. The Calcutta HC noted that the Tribunal had accepted the appellate finding that the alleged loans were proved on the evidence and that the issue was one of appreciation of facts rather than a question of law. As no perversity in the factual finding was established, the additions relating to the disputed cash credits were not sustained and the reference was answered for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee had discharged the onus under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of the disputed cash credits, and whether the Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions relating to the two assessment years.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the genuineness of the alleged loans and the assessee's burden to prove the nature and source of the cash credits. The Tribunal had examined the evidence on record and accepted the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the loans were proved. The matter was one of appreciation of evidence and discharge of onus, both of which were treated as questions of fact. No perversity in the Tribunal's factual finding was shown.

Conclusion: The questions were answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The additions made in respect of the cash credits were not sustained, and the reference was answered for the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee discharges the burden under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the factual finding on genuineness of cash credits is not shown to be perverse, the finding will not be disturbed in reference jurisdiction.

---