https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780985 ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of additions for jewellery found in a search, noting those items belonged to the family and Revenue did not challenge that finding, making it final. As to ten expensive wristwatches seized, ITAT agreed with CIT(A) that presuming them solely to belong to the assessee was unjustified where multiple family members occupied the premises; their value appeared commensurate with family status and, absent purchase dates, Revenue could not revalue them at current prices. The assessee's appeal was therefore partly allowed. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Nov 2025 10:59:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780985 ITAT upheld CIT(A)'s deletion of additions for jewellery found in a search, noting those items belonged to the family and Revenue did not challenge that finding, making it final. As to ten expensive wristwatches seized, ITAT agreed with CIT(A) that presuming them solely to belong to the assessee was unjustified where multiple family members occupied the premises; their value appeared commensurate with family status and, absent purchase dates, Revenue could not revalue them at current prices. The assessee's appeal was therefore partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780985