https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358014 The Revenue's appeal against the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,05,00,000 as unexplained investment in jewellery was dismissed. The CIT (A) and Tribunal found that the jewellery in question belonged to the assessee's wife, daughter, and mother, considering societal norms and family traditions. The authorities noted the lack of evidence to refute the claim and upheld the deletion, emphasizing that the Revenue failed to provide contrary material. en-us Wed, 28 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Apr 2018 06:38:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358014 The Revenue's appeal against the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,05,00,000 as unexplained investment in jewellery was dismissed. The CIT (A) and Tribunal found that the jewellery in question belonged to the assessee's wife, daughter, and mother, considering societal norms and family traditions. The authorities noted the lack of evidence to refute the claim and upheld the deletion, emphasizing that the Revenue failed to provide contrary material. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358014