<?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>1992 (11) TMI 131 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63218</link>
    <description>Gold jewellery found in an assessee&#039;s premises may be treated as owned by the assessee where supporting records do not establish third-party ownership, but a deemed-income addition under section 69A cannot be made without first giving a proper opportunity to explain the nature and source of acquisition. The matter on gold jewellery was therefore remitted for fresh examination after such opportunity. By contrast, diamond jewellery found during survey was accepted as explained stock because the assessee&#039;s approval-based acquisition was corroborated by supplier confirmation, purchase records and cheque payments, and no contrary material displaced that explanation. The deletion of that addition was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:17:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (11) TMI 131 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63218</link>
      <description>Gold jewellery found in an assessee&#039;s premises may be treated as owned by the assessee where supporting records do not establish third-party ownership, but a deemed-income addition under section 69A cannot be made without first giving a proper opportunity to explain the nature and source of acquisition. The matter on gold jewellery was therefore remitted for fresh examination after such opportunity. By contrast, diamond jewellery found during survey was accepted as explained stock because the assessee&#039;s approval-based acquisition was corroborated by supplier confirmation, purchase records and cheque payments, and no contrary material displaced that explanation. The deletion of that addition was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63218</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>