Law:

Section:

Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained moneys - Some shares belonging to assessee were found in a raid in her father-in-law's house - In reply to notice, assessee claimed that shares were purchased out of a loan from 'R' and from her personal savings - Tribunal disbelieved assessee's explanation and treated those amounts as unexplained income of assessee - Whether once assessee claimed ownership of shares and offered an explanation regarding loan amount and personal savings, it was up to her to specifically prove that - Held, yes - Whether there was no error of law in order of Tribunal and no question of law arose - Held, yes FACTS In a raid on the house of the father-in-law of the assessee, some shares were found which were claimed as the assessee's individual property. In explanation given as reply to the notice sent by the department, it was claimed that the shares were purchased firstly out of the amounts raised by way of loan from one 'R' and also out of the amount from the personal savings of the assessee. The two amounts from which shares were so purchased had been disbelieved by the authorities and had been treated as unexplained income. The Tribunal also held the loan received from 'R' and the assessee's personal savings as undisclosed income. On appeal : HELD The Tribunal was not bound to give a finding as to which particular amount was utilised to purchase which particular share. Once the assessee claimed the ownership of the shares and offered an explanation that she had raised the loan amount from one 'R' and the personal savings, it was up to her to specifically prove that. That story had rightly not been accepted by the Tribunal as well as by the other authorities. The Tribunal had given good reasons to reject the story regarding the sum allegedly raised from 'R' and the reasons thereof were agreed with. So also, the Tribunal had given good reasons to disbelieve the story of the personal savings on account of the contrary statements of the father-in-law of the assessee. There was no error of law, much less a substantial error of law in, the matter. Ms. Anitha Sumanth for the Appellant. JUDGMENT V.S. Sirpurkar, J. - The assessee…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492