https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184287 Where a credit entry in the name of a third party appeared suspicious on the assessment material, the Income-tax Officer could require the assessee to prove its genuineness under Section 23(3), and the assessee's failure to offer a credible explanation justified an inference that the amount was revenue receipt. Information obtained during assessment, including the finding that the credit explanation was false, could constitute definite information for reopening under Section 34 if it gave rise to an honest and reasonable belief that income had escaped assessment. The Revenue's position was upheld on the treatment of the disputed credit and the validity of reassessment. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 1947 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jul 2016 17:17:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184287 Where a credit entry in the name of a third party appeared suspicious on the assessment material, the Income-tax Officer could require the assessee to prove its genuineness under Section 23(3), and the assessee's failure to offer a credible explanation justified an inference that the amount was revenue receipt. Information obtained during assessment, including the finding that the credit explanation was false, could constitute definite information for reopening under Section 34 if it gave rise to an honest and reasonable belief that income had escaped assessment. The Revenue's position was upheld on the treatment of the disputed credit and the validity of reassessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Apr 1947 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184287