<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1968 (9) TMI 31 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7426</link>
    <description>An unexplained receipt can be treated as income only where the inference is reasonably supported by evidence after considering the surrounding facts and circumstances; a mere rejection of the assessee&#039;s explanation is not enough. The Kerala HC noted that the assessee had no substantial known source of income in the relevant period apart from agricultural property and had begun business only later, yet the tax authorities relied only on the rejected explanation for the credited amount and property investments without testing whether the amounts could properly be inferred as previous-year income. On that basis, the addition as income from undisclosed sources was held invalid and the disputed amount was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46476" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (9) TMI 31 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7426</link>
      <description>An unexplained receipt can be treated as income only where the inference is reasonably supported by evidence after considering the surrounding facts and circumstances; a mere rejection of the assessee&#039;s explanation is not enough. The Kerala HC noted that the assessee had no substantial known source of income in the relevant period apart from agricultural property and had begun business only later, yet the tax authorities relied only on the rejected explanation for the credited amount and property investments without testing whether the amounts could properly be inferred as previous-year income. On that basis, the addition as income from undisclosed sources was held invalid and the disputed amount was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7426</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>