This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
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)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2018-19
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Bangalore
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
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...




