https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3155 The court upheld the Assessing Officer's decision to reject evidence related to hand loans and creation of presumption from seized records, citing the appellant's failure to provide satisfactory explanations. The treatment of loan amount from Krishnappa as income was upheld, with the court finding insufficient evidence to support the appellant's claims. The court criticized the Tribunal's decision on rectification of mistakes but refrained from interference due to lack of appeal from the Department. The legality of charging interest under section 158BF was affirmed, leading to the rejection of the appeal without costs. en-us Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3155 The court upheld the Assessing Officer's decision to reject evidence related to hand loans and creation of presumption from seized records, citing the appellant's failure to provide satisfactory explanations. The treatment of loan amount from Krishnappa as income was upheld, with the court finding insufficient evidence to support the appellant's claims. The court criticized the Tribunal's decision on rectification of mistakes but refrained from interference due to lack of appeal from the Department. The legality of charging interest under section 158BF was affirmed, leading to the rejection of the appeal without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3155