https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183949 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) assessee, holding that the disputed gifted amounts from five donors could not be treated as undisclosed income. The Tribunal found that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) failed to provide evidence proving the gifts were arranged or fictitious, shifting the burden of proof to the department once the assessee established the donors' identity and credit-worthiness. As a result, the gifts were accepted, and the assessment was adjusted accordingly. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183949 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) assessee, holding that the disputed gifted amounts from five donors could not be treated as undisclosed income. The Tribunal found that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) failed to provide evidence proving the gifts were arranged or fictitious, shifting the burden of proof to the department once the assessee established the donors' identity and credit-worthiness. As a result, the gifts were accepted, and the assessment was adjusted accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183949