https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428799 The assessee failed to substantiate that a cash deposit of Rs. 30,00,000 represented sale consideration from his wife's land. The sale deed reflected only Rs. 3,35,700, and the assessee neither examined the wife, who was the vendor, nor produced cogent evidence to prove receipt of the full deposit as consideration. Mere reliance on the sale deed and an assertion of higher market value was insufficient to discharge the burden of proof. The Kerala HC found the shifting-burden principle inapplicable on these facts and declined interference with the addition sustained by the Tribunal. en-us Fri, 25 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:20:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428799 The assessee failed to substantiate that a cash deposit of Rs. 30,00,000 represented sale consideration from his wife's land. The sale deed reflected only Rs. 3,35,700, and the assessee neither examined the wife, who was the vendor, nor produced cogent evidence to prove receipt of the full deposit as consideration. Mere reliance on the sale deed and an assertion of higher market value was insufficient to discharge the burden of proof. The Kerala HC found the shifting-burden principle inapplicable on these facts and declined interference with the addition sustained by the Tribunal. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428799