https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340455 The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by deleting additions for jewelry valuation and car, while upholding the disallowance under section 14A. The matter concerning jewelry valuation charges was remanded for verification. The Tribunal found discrepancies in valuation were due to different market rates and not new acquisitions, leading to the deletion of the addition under section 69A. The explanation provided for the car purchase was deemed satisfactory, resulting in the deletion of the addition on account of the car. en-us Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340455 The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal by deleting additions for jewelry valuation and car, while upholding the disallowance under section 14A. The matter concerning jewelry valuation charges was remanded for verification. The Tribunal found discrepancies in valuation were due to different market rates and not new acquisitions, leading to the deletion of the addition under section 69A. The explanation provided for the car purchase was deemed satisfactory, resulting in the deletion of the addition on account of the car. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340455