Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

54. The burden to prove the income which stands accounted for, is on the assessee. In Sreelekha Banerjee V. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1963) 49 ITR (SC) 112, the Court held that:

"It seems to us that the correct approach to .

questions of this kind is this. If there is an entry in the account books of the assessee which shows the receipt of a sum on conversion of high denomination notes tendered for conversion by the assessee himself, it is necessary for the assessee to establish, if asked; what the source of of that money is and to prove that it does not bear the nature of income. The department is not at this stage required to prove anything. It can ask rt the assessee to bring any books of account or other documents or evidence pertinent to the explanation if one is furnished, and examine the evidence and the explanation. If the explanation shows that the receipt was not. of an income nature, the department cannot act unreasonably and reject that explanation to hold that it was income. If, however, the explanation is unconvincing and one which deserves to be rejected, the department can reject it and draw the inference that the amount represents income either from the sources already disclosed by the assessee or from some undisclosed source. The department does, not then proceed on no evidence, because the fact that there was receipt of money is itself evidence against the assessee. There is thus, prima facie, evidence against the assessee which he fails to rebut, and being unrebutted, that evidence can be used against him by holding that it was a receipt of an income nature. The very words 'an undisclosed source' show that the disclosure must come from the assessee and not from the department. In cases of .

high denomination notes, where the business and the state of accounts and dealings of the assessee justify a reasonable inference that he might have for convenience kept the whole or a part of a particular sum in high denomination notes, the assessee prima facie discharges his initial burden of when he proves the balance and that it might reasonably have been kept in high denomination notes. Before the department rejects such rt evidence, it must either show an weakness in the explanation or rebut it by putting inherent to the assessee some information or evidence which it has in its possession. The department cannot by merely rejecting unreasonably a good explanation, convert good proof into no proof."