https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65899 Fixed deposits standing in the name of the assessee's daughter were treated as belonging to the deceased assessee because they were found with his documents and under his control, attracting the statutory presumption of ownership under section 132(4A). The explanation that the funds came from gifts, business income, or earlier savings was rejected as unsatisfactory, and the assessee failed to rebut the presumption or prove a credible source. The reference to omission of assets in an order under section 132(5) was also rejected because that order is only a summary measure and does not determine ownership. The deposits were therefore assessed as unexplained income under section 69. en-us Thu, 28 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Feb 2011 11:58:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65899 Fixed deposits standing in the name of the assessee's daughter were treated as belonging to the deceased assessee because they were found with his documents and under his control, attracting the statutory presumption of ownership under section 132(4A). The explanation that the funds came from gifts, business income, or earlier savings was rejected as unsatisfactory, and the assessee failed to rebut the presumption or prove a credible source. The reference to omission of assets in an order under section 132(5) was also rejected because that order is only a summary measure and does not determine ownership. The deposits were therefore assessed as unexplained income under section 69. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65899