<?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 (9) TMI 919 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798893</link>
    <description>Section 69A requires jewellery to be assessed as unexplained only where the taxpayer&#039;s explanation of its nature and source is unsupported. Consistent historical wealth-tax records, valuation reports, family-distribution evidence and physical verification can explain inherited or long-held jewellery; non-filing of wealth-tax returns alone does not prove disposal. Accordingly, the disclosed jewellery was treated as satisfactorily explained. Brokerage for property identification and negotiation is ordinarily personal-service income and cannot be attributed to an HUF without a real nexus to HUF funds or assets. Where the individual service provider was separately paid for the same transaction, an additional HUF payment was not established as deductible investment cost.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 08:32:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=922776" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (9) TMI 919 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798893</link>
      <description>Section 69A requires jewellery to be assessed as unexplained only where the taxpayer&#039;s explanation of its nature and source is unsupported. Consistent historical wealth-tax records, valuation reports, family-distribution evidence and physical verification can explain inherited or long-held jewellery; non-filing of wealth-tax returns alone does not prove disposal. Accordingly, the disclosed jewellery was treated as satisfactorily explained. Brokerage for property identification and negotiation is ordinarily personal-service income and cannot be attributed to an HUF without a real nexus to HUF funds or assets. Where the individual service provider was separately paid for the same transaction, an additional HUF payment was not established as deductible investment cost.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>