https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63770 Seized documents, admissions, separate accounts and surrounding evidence were treated as sufficient to show that the moneylending activity belonged to the three brothers, not their mother or a Hindu undivided family; the competing family and HUF claims were rejected, and the alleged additional evidence was not admitted. On reassessment, reopening under section 147(a) was upheld because the search material supported a reasonable belief of escapement of income, despite some incorrect assumptions in the recorded reasons. Most additions for interest income, unexplained investment, marriage expenditure, cash and capital gain were sustained, with limited deletions and directions to recompute later years by giving credit for available funds. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Feb 2011 17:07:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63770 Seized documents, admissions, separate accounts and surrounding evidence were treated as sufficient to show that the moneylending activity belonged to the three brothers, not their mother or a Hindu undivided family; the competing family and HUF claims were rejected, and the alleged additional evidence was not admitted. On reassessment, reopening under section 147(a) was upheld because the search material supported a reasonable belief of escapement of income, despite some incorrect assumptions in the recorded reasons. Most additions for interest income, unexplained investment, marriage expenditure, cash and capital gain were sustained, with limited deletions and directions to recompute later years by giving credit for available funds. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63770