Section 69C addition sustained where unexplained stamp duty and court fee expenditure lacked credible proof of source.

Addition under section 69C was sustained because the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the source of expenditure said to have been incurred towards stamp duty and court fees. The appellate authorities found, on concurrent facts, that the explanation lacked credible documentary or circumstantial support, the affidavit relied on was self-serving, and no satisfactory material was produced to verify the alleged source or return of cash. On those findings, no substantial question of law arose for consideration under section 260-A.

---

---

Issues: Whether any substantial question of law arose from the concurrent findings sustaining the addition made under section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The addition was based on the assessee's failure to satisfactorily explain the source of the amount found to have been spent towards stamp duty and court fees. The appellate authorities recorded concurrent factual findings that the explanation was unsupported by credible documentary or circumstantial evidence, that the affidavit relied upon was self-serving, and that no satisfactory material was produced to verify the alleged source or return of the cash.

Conclusion: No substantial question of law arose for consideration under section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

---