<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (2) TMI 874 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786726</link>
    <description>Excess gold, silver and diamond stock detected during survey was taxable as business income because it directly related to the jeweller&#039;s sole regular business, was credited to the trading and profit and loss accounts, and was disclosed in the returns. Treatment as unexplained investment subject to the special tax regime for unexplained income was therefore inapplicable. Sales-promotion expenses were fully disallowed because supporting vouchers and cash-payment evidence were inadequate. Meal expenses were disallowed because duplicate booking was established and the partial relief lacked justification. Vehicle expenses were disallowed for personal use at the higher rate because personal use was admitted and no log books or evidence supported a lower disallowance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 12:17:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 874 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786726</link>
      <description>Excess gold, silver and diamond stock detected during survey was taxable as business income because it directly related to the jeweller&#039;s sole regular business, was credited to the trading and profit and loss accounts, and was disclosed in the returns. Treatment as unexplained investment subject to the special tax regime for unexplained income was therefore inapplicable. Sales-promotion expenses were fully disallowed because supporting vouchers and cash-payment evidence were inadequate. Meal expenses were disallowed because duplicate booking was established and the partial relief lacked justification. Vehicle expenses were disallowed for personal use at the higher rate because personal use was admitted and no log books or evidence supported a lower disallowance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>