https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19828 Unexplained cash credits under section 68 depended on the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence as to the identity and capacity of the depositors. Where identity was proved but capacity was not, the addition was sustained; where both identity and capacity were proved, the deposits were accepted. On those findings, the question whether a cash credit was explained was a pure question of fact, and no arbitrariness or impossibility in the Tribunal's inferences was shown. No referable question of law arose, so the applications under section 256(2) were rightly rejected. en-us Mon, 20 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:14:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19828 Unexplained cash credits under section 68 depended on the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence as to the identity and capacity of the depositors. Where identity was proved but capacity was not, the addition was sustained; where both identity and capacity were proved, the deposits were accepted. On those findings, the question whether a cash credit was explained was a pure question of fact, and no arbitrariness or impossibility in the Tribunal's inferences was shown. No referable question of law arose, so the applications under section 256(2) were rightly rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 Dec 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19828