<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1982 (3) TMI 60 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29619</link>
    <description>Section 69A can apply where an assessee is found in possession of valuable articles not recorded in the books of account and offers no satisfactory explanation of their source. Ownership is a factual question to be determined from surrounding circumstances, and possession is a significant indicator; section 110 of the Evidence Act supports an inference of ownership as prima facie proof. On the stated facts, the assessee was a dealer in precious stones, was found with the seized articles, and the explanation for their receipt and custody was rejected, so the finding of ownership was supported by material and was not perverse or erroneous in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:38:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68616" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (3) TMI 60 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29619</link>
      <description>Section 69A can apply where an assessee is found in possession of valuable articles not recorded in the books of account and offers no satisfactory explanation of their source. Ownership is a factual question to be determined from surrounding circumstances, and possession is a significant indicator; section 110 of the Evidence Act supports an inference of ownership as prima facie proof. On the stated facts, the assessee was a dealer in precious stones, was found with the seized articles, and the explanation for their receipt and custody was rejected, so the finding of ownership was supported by material and was not perverse or erroneous in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29619</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>