https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118577 The ITAT partially upheld the Revenue's appeal. It affirmed the deletion of the Rs. 1,13,54,683 addition in gross profit on jewellery sales, agreeing with the CIT(A) that there was no evidence of underpricing. However, the ITAT reversed the CIT(A)'s decision on depreciation, ruling that it cannot be applied to the land portion, only to the building, based on the distinct pricing in the conveyance deed. en-us Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Apr 2024 10:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118577 The ITAT partially upheld the Revenue's appeal. It affirmed the deletion of the Rs. 1,13,54,683 addition in gross profit on jewellery sales, agreeing with the CIT(A) that there was no evidence of underpricing. However, the ITAT reversed the CIT(A)'s decision on depreciation, ruling that it cannot be applied to the land portion, only to the building, based on the distinct pricing in the conveyance deed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118577