Mudita Chaturvedi Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Case ke facts
Mudita Chaturvedi ki jewellery pakdi gayi thi – 719 gram. Assessing Officer ne isko unexplained bol diya aur Section 69 se income maan li, par family ka status shadi-shuda aur society mein theek tha.
Mudda (Issue)
Kya itni jewellery ko unexplained maan sakte hain ya nahi?
Faisla (Held)
ITAT Delhi ne bola ki family ka status aur shadi-vivah ke mauke pe itni jewellery reasonable hai. Section 69 addition hata di gayi.
Practical takeaway
Agar jewellery ka weight family status aur rishton ke hisaab se sahi hai to us par addition nahi ho sakti. Achhe se explain/justify kar do ki kis kaunsa function tha.
Original report: taxguru.in
Aapke case mein bhi aisa hi mudda hai?
CGA ki team notice, appeal aur department proceedings mein kaam karti hai. Documents ke saath baat kariye.
WhatsApp par poochiyeIncome tax notice ka jawabAur Income Tax faisle
- Abhishek Jayraj Karnani Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)ITAT Ahmedabad · Section 270A
- DCIT Vs Artline Vinimay Private Limited (ITAT Delhi)ITAT Delhi
- ITO Vs Suraj Somaru Varma (ITAT Mumbai)ITAT Mumbai · Section 68
- PCIT Vs Sheetal Dushyant Chaturvedi (Supreme Court)Supreme Court · Section 147
- Shriganesh Kirana Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)ITAT Delhi · Section 68
- KLSR Infratech Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad)ITAT Hyderabad · Section 69A, Section 69C, Section 80IA
Yeh summary public report par aadhaarit general jaankari hai, legal advice nahi. Poora faisla padhne ke liye original source dekhiye. Published on cgaindia.com: 2026-10-05.