https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189650 For additions based on seized valuables, the Department must prove ownership; mere possession is insufficient, and the presumptions in the Evidence Act and section 132(4A) of the Income-tax Act were treated as not controlling assessment proceedings. On the facts, the assessee was treated as only a carrier for the gold, so the gold-related addition failed, while the unexplained foreign currency remained taxable. Confiscation loss on smuggled gold could still qualify as a business or commercial loss where the transaction amounted to a business adventure, even if illegal. Interest under section 217 was upheld only up to the original assessment stage, and valuation at international market price was accepted over local market value. en-us Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jan 2017 15:49:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189650 For additions based on seized valuables, the Department must prove ownership; mere possession is insufficient, and the presumptions in the Evidence Act and section 132(4A) of the Income-tax Act were treated as not controlling assessment proceedings. On the facts, the assessee was treated as only a carrier for the gold, so the gold-related addition failed, while the unexplained foreign currency remained taxable. Confiscation loss on smuggled gold could still qualify as a business or commercial loss where the transaction amounted to a business adventure, even if illegal. Interest under section 217 was upheld only up to the original assessment stage, and valuation at international market price was accepted over local market value. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189650