https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399329 HC upheld the Tribunal's acceptance of the assessee's explanation under s.68, finding the explanation more than probabilized and constituting concurrent findings of fact not vitiated by perversity. The court held that SC authority requires human probabilities to be considered and that a contrary HC decision was fact-specific and distinguishable. Because no substantial question of law or perversity was shown, the HC declined to interfere and dismissed the challenge. en-us Mon, 28 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Aug 2025 21:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399329 HC upheld the Tribunal's acceptance of the assessee's explanation under s.68, finding the explanation more than probabilized and constituting concurrent findings of fact not vitiated by perversity. The court held that SC authority requires human probabilities to be considered and that a contrary HC decision was fact-specific and distinguishable. Because no substantial question of law or perversity was shown, the HC declined to interfere and dismissed the challenge. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 28 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399329