ACIT-CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA vs. PUNEET AGARWAL, AGRA
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, the CO raised by the assessee and appeal filed by the Revenue are dismissed
ITA 338/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16
Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)
132(4) of the LT. Act the assessee admitted that the source of excess jewellery of Rs.99,31,727/-was not explained and it was over and above the jewellery purchased/remade/declared under VDIS 1997. 10) That the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs.99,31,727/ - made by the AO on account