Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

No addition u/s 69B as seized quantity of jewellery was under the Limit prescribed by Circular No. 1916

Case Law Details

Case Name
DCIT Vs Suresh Kanaji (ITAT Bangalore)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2018-19
Advertisement
DCIT Vs Suresh Kanaji (ITAT Bangalore) Conclusion: Addition made under Section 69B concerning seized jewellery was deleted as gold jewellery found during a search at the residence of the taxpayer was within the permissible limits prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 1916, and therefore, could not be treated as an unexplained investment. Held: Assessee was a Bangalore-based contractor, whose residence was searched by Income Tax authorities. During the search, officials discovered 1,724.82 grams of gold jewellery, out of which 612.86 grams were seized on the ground that the taxpayer failed to expla...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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