https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216422 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, deleting the addition of Rs.5,04,605 made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by the AO was misinterpreted and unsustainable. It noted that the jewelry was physically transferred to the buyers, with sale proceeds received through banking channels, and the purchasers confirmed the transactions without retracting their statements. The Tribunal concluded that the addition was not supported by material evidence and overturned the decision, ruling in favor of the assessee. en-us Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Sep 2012 12:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216422 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, deleting the addition of Rs.5,04,605 made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by the AO was misinterpreted and unsustainable. It noted that the jewelry was physically transferred to the buyers, with sale proceeds received through banking channels, and the purchasers confirmed the transactions without retracting their statements. The Tribunal concluded that the addition was not supported by material evidence and overturned the decision, ruling in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216422