https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68967 The Tribunal upheld the AAC's decision to delete the addition under 'Income from other sources' for the assessee, determining that the document in question was a promissory note, not a hundi. The Tribunal found that the circular cited did not support the department's position, as it pertained to different types of hundis not subject to section 69D. Based on legal definitions and precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the distinction between hundis and promissory notes in its decision. en-us Wed, 16 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:29:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68967 The Tribunal upheld the AAC's decision to delete the addition under 'Income from other sources' for the assessee, determining that the document in question was a promissory note, not a hundi. The Tribunal found that the circular cited did not support the department's position, as it pertained to different types of hundis not subject to section 69D. Based on legal definitions and precedents, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the distinction between hundis and promissory notes in its decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Feb 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68967