<?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>1988 (7) TMI 88 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56216</link>
    <description>Cash found in an assessee&#039;s possession can be assessed under section 69A only if the revenue first establishes that the assessee was the owner of unexplained money and that no satisfactory explanation of its nature and source exists. Mere possession creates only a rebuttable presumption of ownership, which may be displaced by credible evidence. Here, the assessee promptly explained that the cash belonged to seven third parties, and that explanation was supported by affidavits, sworn statements, revenue records, and evidence of agricultural receipts. Applying the preponderance of probabilities test, the explanation was accepted and the addition under section 69A was held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 13:33:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=94678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (7) TMI 88 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56216</link>
      <description>Cash found in an assessee&#039;s possession can be assessed under section 69A only if the revenue first establishes that the assessee was the owner of unexplained money and that no satisfactory explanation of its nature and source exists. Mere possession creates only a rebuttable presumption of ownership, which may be displaced by credible evidence. Here, the assessee promptly explained that the cash belonged to seven third parties, and that explanation was supported by affidavits, sworn statements, revenue records, and evidence of agricultural receipts. Applying the preponderance of probabilities test, the explanation was accepted and the addition under section 69A was held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56216</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>