Judgment :- Radhakrishnan, J. This appeal arises out of the order in ITA No 286/Coch/2001 passed by the Incometax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. 2. The assessee is a travel agent. Their main source of income is from sale of air tickets. During the course of the assessment proceedings the assessing officer noticed that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year the assessee company has introduced on various dates cash in the name of one Director V.J. Thomas, amounting to Rs.1,48,000/-. When Thomas was questioned he had initially stated that no ostensible source of income other than the salary he was getting from the assessee company. On verification of the accounts it was found that the assessee had repaid the loans in cash on various dates during the period from 21.11.1995 to 12.3.1996 and the balance outstanding as per the assessee’s accounts in the credit of V.J. Thomas was Rs.29,000/-. On questioning the director, he stated that he had not given any amount to the company as “his own”. He further stated that he was getting salary of Rs.3,500/- per month and reimbursement of vehicle expenses. Assessing officer came to the conclusion that Thomas had not paid any cash loan to the assessee company. Hence the assessing authority found that it was not a genuine transaction. Appellant thereupon approached the first appellate authority who dismissed the appeal. Dissatisfied with that assessee filed appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. 3. Before the Tribunal Department has stated that the assessee had no source of income and he had no source and is not aware of the amounts. Assessee further stated that he was not having any income other than the salary and reimbursement of vehicle expenses. Later he gave another explanation that his wife Lally had received Rs.1.25 lakhs and 35 sovereigns of gold at the time of marriage and her father gave money by sale of shares in the family’s agricultural property at Kodancherry village. Further he has stated that he borrowed money from his friend who was working in Apollo Jewellery, which is near to his office and also stated that he had received kury amount from K.S.F.E., Calicut. Initially he had no explanation to offer. The Tribunal also found that subsequently he changed his version and stated that he had received money from his wife. Further he had stated that he had received money from his friend. Initially he had no explanation to offer. The Tribunal also found that subsequently he changed his version and stated that he had received money from his wife. Further he had stated that he had received money from his friend. There is no consistency in his version. Under such circumstances the Tribunal found no error in the decision taken by the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority. 4. Counsel appearing for the Department brought to our notice decision of this court in 92 ITR 147 to submit that burden is entirely on the assessee to establish the source and to give acceptable explanation. For establishing the source it is stated that Thomas had received the amount of Rs.25,000/- from Bank of India by withdrawing the savings on 17.10.1996 and another sum of Rs.20,000/- was received towards sale proceeds. There is no explanation for the appellant to the said documents as well. 5. We find no illegality in the orders passed by the authorities below to be interfered with by us in this appeal. The appeal lacks merits and it is accordingly dismissed.