<?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>2006 (6) TMI 87 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9880</link>
    <description>Unexplained gold ornaments found in an assessee&#039;s possession require the assessee to establish their source with reliable evidence. Newly made gold bangles discovered during a search were not supported by contemporaneous records corroborating the later claim that they belonged to customers. A sworn statement made at the time indicated a different account of the gold&#039;s receipt and preparation. The standing or status of alleged owners does not, by itself, prove the truth of later ownership claims. Failure to rebut the adverse inference permits the value of seized valuables to be treated as income from undisclosed sources; the addition was therefore justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=48902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (6) TMI 87 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9880</link>
      <description>Unexplained gold ornaments found in an assessee&#039;s possession require the assessee to establish their source with reliable evidence. Newly made gold bangles discovered during a search were not supported by contemporaneous records corroborating the later claim that they belonged to customers. A sworn statement made at the time indicated a different account of the gold&#039;s receipt and preparation. The standing or status of alleged owners does not, by itself, prove the truth of later ownership claims. Failure to rebut the adverse inference permits the value of seized valuables to be treated as income from undisclosed sources; the addition was therefore justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9880</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>