https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28417 The Tribunal's decision that the property purchased in the name of Ayodhya Prasad was actually bought by the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) was deemed legally incorrect. The burden of proof was held to not lie on the assessee to demonstrate that the property was not acquired from undisclosed HUF sources. The Tribunal's failure to consider crucial evidence and flawed reasoning led to the judgment directing a review of the case to determine the legality of attributing the property purchase to the HUF. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:08:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28417 The Tribunal's decision that the property purchased in the name of Ayodhya Prasad was actually bought by the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) was deemed legally incorrect. The burden of proof was held to not lie on the assessee to demonstrate that the property was not acquired from undisclosed HUF sources. The Tribunal's failure to consider crucial evidence and flawed reasoning led to the judgment directing a review of the case to determine the legality of attributing the property purchase to the HUF. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28417