https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67644 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3,21,000 as unexplained income, as the evidence showed that the cash belonged to the firm and not the assessee. Despite Revenue's arguments of fabrication and discrepancies, the Tribunal found the assessee had no substantial means apart from salary, supported by cash book entries and the letter during police apprehension. As the assessee met the burden of proof under section 69, and the AO failed to provide evidence against the claim, the Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal. en-us Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:10:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67644 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 3,21,000 as unexplained income, as the evidence showed that the cash belonged to the firm and not the assessee. Despite Revenue's arguments of fabrication and discrepancies, the Tribunal found the assessee had no substantial means apart from salary, supported by cash book entries and the letter during police apprehension. As the assessee met the burden of proof under section 69, and the AO failed to provide evidence against the claim, the Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67644