https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8307 In disputes over encashment of high denomination notes, an explanation may be accepted where the assessee shows possession of funds sufficient to cover the notes, but an adverse inference is permissible where no satisfactory source is proved. The Tribunal's rejection of the explanation for the amount traced to the currency office and the claimed cash component was supported by the record because reliable proof was lacking. However, the explanation relating to the loan transaction was not inherently improbable once prior receipt of high denomination notes on sale of property had been established, and that aspect was not properly evaluated. The addition was therefore sustained only to the extent of the proved unexplained amount, while the further addition was unsustainable. en-us Thu, 17 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2009 12:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8307 In disputes over encashment of high denomination notes, an explanation may be accepted where the assessee shows possession of funds sufficient to cover the notes, but an adverse inference is permissible where no satisfactory source is proved. The Tribunal's rejection of the explanation for the amount traced to the currency office and the claimed cash component was supported by the record because reliable proof was lacking. However, the explanation relating to the loan transaction was not inherently improbable once prior receipt of high denomination notes on sale of property had been established, and that aspect was not properly evaluated. The addition was therefore sustained only to the extent of the proved unexplained amount, while the further addition was unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 17 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8307