https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151991 In forfeiture proceedings, the person affected must prove the lawful source of acquisition. The Tribunal accepted the explanation for the first property, finding that LIC policy-loan material and related records showed the loan proceeds were used to purchase the land, so the burden was discharged and forfeiture was set aside. For the second property, the Tribunal rejected reliance on unauthenticated foreign certificates and letters said to show overseas employment and remittances, and found that only part of the consideration was explained. The remaining amount was not proved to be from lawful sources, so forfeiture of the house was sustained. en-us Tue, 09 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:11:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151991 In forfeiture proceedings, the person affected must prove the lawful source of acquisition. The Tribunal accepted the explanation for the first property, finding that LIC policy-loan material and related records showed the loan proceeds were used to purchase the land, so the burden was discharged and forfeiture was set aside. For the second property, the Tribunal rejected reliance on unauthenticated foreign certificates and letters said to show overseas employment and remittances, and found that only part of the consideration was explained. The remaining amount was not proved to be from lawful sources, so forfeiture of the house was sustained. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 09 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151991