https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23685 The court upheld that the seized cash belonged to the assessee, dismissing the daughter's ownership claim due to delayed assertions and lack of immediate explanation about the income source. The daughter's delayed claim and failure to provide up-to-date cash books raised doubts. The court rejected arguments for applying section 132(4A) to presume the cash as the daughter's. The judgment affirmed the legality of the search and authorities' findings, concluding no merit in the petitioner's claims. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:06:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23685 The court upheld that the seized cash belonged to the assessee, dismissing the daughter's ownership claim due to delayed assertions and lack of immediate explanation about the income source. The daughter's delayed claim and failure to provide up-to-date cash books raised doubts. The court rejected arguments for applying section 132(4A) to presume the cash as the daughter's. The judgment affirmed the legality of the search and authorities' findings, concluding no merit in the petitioner's claims. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23685