https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9976 HC upheld the CIT(A) and Tribunal, holding the assessee entitled to exemption under section 54 for the house purchased in the spouse's name after sale of the Bangalore property. Revenue failed to produce convincing materials to deny the claim. The Tribunal's acceptance of disclosed jewellery purchases (five sovereigns in each relevant year and diamond jewellery) was affirmed, with the burden of proof found not met by the Revenue, and the additions on account of investment in jewellery were disallowed. en-us Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Sep 2025 15:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9976 HC upheld the CIT(A) and Tribunal, holding the assessee entitled to exemption under section 54 for the house purchased in the spouse's name after sale of the Bangalore property. Revenue failed to produce convincing materials to deny the claim. The Tribunal's acceptance of disclosed jewellery purchases (five sovereigns in each relevant year and diamond jewellery) was affirmed, with the burden of proof found not met by the Revenue, and the additions on account of investment in jewellery were disallowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9976