https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304355 The appeal was against the addition of Rs. 32,40,469 on jewellery found during a search operation. The assessee claimed the jewellery was acquired over the years through various sources. The CIT(A) upheld the addition based on the Assessing Officer's assessment. However, the Tribunal allowed the appeal partially, directing the AO to consider only the excess jewellery found beyond the specified quantity in the CBDT Circular, taking into account family members. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific sources to explain the acquisition of assets and dismissed grounds challenging the addition of excess jewellery. en-us Tue, 06 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Sep 2022 07:38:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304355 The appeal was against the addition of Rs. 32,40,469 on jewellery found during a search operation. The assessee claimed the jewellery was acquired over the years through various sources. The CIT(A) upheld the addition based on the Assessing Officer's assessment. However, the Tribunal allowed the appeal partially, directing the AO to consider only the excess jewellery found beyond the specified quantity in the CBDT Circular, taking into account family members. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific sources to explain the acquisition of assets and dismissed grounds challenging the addition of excess jewellery. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 06 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304355