https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194566 In summary income-tax proceedings, an addition for unexplained investment was sustained on the basis of preponderance of probability and surrounding material, including police record, angadia documents and the assessee's statement under section 161 CrPC. The tribunal held that strict rules of evidence do not apply in such proceedings, and the absence of cross-examination of the complainant was not fatal where the assessee had an opportunity to rebut the material and failed to discharge the primary burden of proving that the money did not belong to him. The contrary explanation was rejected and the addition upheld. en-us Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Sep 2017 20:58:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194566 In summary income-tax proceedings, an addition for unexplained investment was sustained on the basis of preponderance of probability and surrounding material, including police record, angadia documents and the assessee's statement under section 161 CrPC. The tribunal held that strict rules of evidence do not apply in such proceedings, and the absence of cross-examination of the complainant was not fatal where the assessee had an opportunity to rebut the material and failed to discharge the primary burden of proving that the money did not belong to him. The contrary explanation was rejected and the addition upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194566