The case pertains to an addition made u/s 69 for unexplained...

The case pertains to an addition made u/s 69 for unexplained investment in agricultural land at Ratlam. The issue revolved around whether the addition was based on presumption or evidence. The Tribunal held that the registered sale deed and bank statements showing payment through post-dated cheques cannot be disregarded. The authorities' apprehension that cash must have exchanged hands is merely a presumption without any evidence. The Tribunal emphasized that presumption, no matter how strong, can never substitute evidence. When documentary evidence in the form of a registered deed and bank statements exist, mere presumption should not prevail. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, giving credence to the documentary evidence over presumption.

---