Income already disclosed under PMGKY, 2016 cannot be treated as Unexplained Income u/s 68

Shri Nawal Kishore Soni Vs. ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)

The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in purchase of gold?

In the instant case, the A.O. as per discussion in assessment order mainly on the ground that assessee has not provided the names and address of those parties to whom he has sold gold rejected the explanation of assessee while accepting the explanation of assessee in re

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.