Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Hitendrakumar Chimanlal Patel Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Hitendrakumar Chimanlal Patel Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) Partial Relief in Jewellery Addition — Benefit Allowed for Relatives’ Jewellery During Search; ₹10 Lakh Addition Deleted  The Ahmedabad Bench of the ITAT partly allowed the appeals of a husband and wife arising from a common search under section 132, relating to addition for unexplained jewellery found at their residence and bank lockers. During search, 2,668 grams of jewellery was found. After allowing relief under CBDT Instruction No. 1916, the AO treated 1,211.7 grams (₹35.74 lakh) as unexplained and added the same 50% substant...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930