https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770508 The ITAT Delhi ruled on unexplained investments under sections 69 and 69A involving seized items during an IT Department search. The tribunal confirmed CIT(A)'s deletion of additions for nine wrist watches, holding that section 69 was incorrectly applied as it pertains to unexplained investments, not unexplained money/valuables under section 69A. For jewellery worth Rs. 1,07,22,844/-, the addition was properly deleted as similar items were already added in AY 2013-14. However, regarding 6200 grams of jewellery, the matter was remanded to AO for examining ownership claims by family members, despite the assessee's statement under section 132(4). Revenue's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 May 2025 09:19:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770508 The ITAT Delhi ruled on unexplained investments under sections 69 and 69A involving seized items during an IT Department search. The tribunal confirmed CIT(A)'s deletion of additions for nine wrist watches, holding that section 69 was incorrectly applied as it pertains to unexplained investments, not unexplained money/valuables under section 69A. For jewellery worth Rs. 1,07,22,844/-, the addition was properly deleted as similar items were already added in AY 2013-14. However, regarding 6200 grams of jewellery, the matter was remanded to AO for examining ownership claims by family members, despite the assessee's statement under section 132(4). Revenue's appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770508