https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24176 Unexplained possession of gold can support a presumption of ownership, and the burden shifts to the person in possession to rebut it. Applying section 110 of the Evidence Act, the High Court held that the assessee, found in possession of 220 tolas of gold and unable to displace the presumption, could not require the Revenue to prove ownership. It further held that the value of unexplained assets in possession may be treated as income under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, so the addition of the gold's value was sustainable and the Tribunal's contrary view was erroneous. en-us Wed, 18 Jan 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:06:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24176 Unexplained possession of gold can support a presumption of ownership, and the burden shifts to the person in possession to rebut it. Applying section 110 of the Evidence Act, the High Court held that the assessee, found in possession of 220 tolas of gold and unable to displace the presumption, could not require the Revenue to prove ownership. It further held that the value of unexplained assets in possession may be treated as income under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, so the addition of the gold's value was sustainable and the Tribunal's contrary view was erroneous. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Jan 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24176