https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467812 Contemporaneous and corroborative evidence of diamond processing and sale- including invoices, confirmations, stock records, bank statements, returns and responses under section 133(6)-was treated as sufficient to displace the allegation that sale proceeds were unexplained cash credits, so the addition under section 68 and the consequential commission addition under section 69C were deleted. For the jewellery issue, the protective addition failed because the jewellery and bullion were found from another family member's premises, the substantive addition stood in that person's hands, and no independent material linked the assessee to the seized assets or established her share; the protective addition was therefore deleted. en-us Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Apr 2026 08:51:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467812 Contemporaneous and corroborative evidence of diamond processing and sale- including invoices, confirmations, stock records, bank statements, returns and responses under section 133(6)-was treated as sufficient to displace the allegation that sale proceeds were unexplained cash credits, so the addition under section 68 and the consequential commission addition under section 69C were deleted. For the jewellery issue, the protective addition failed because the jewellery and bullion were found from another family member's premises, the substantive addition stood in that person's hands, and no independent material linked the assessee to the seized assets or established her share; the protective addition was therefore deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467812