Whether tribunal was correct and justified in law in arriving at a conclusion that items sold by the appellants were different from the jewellery declared?
Income from undisclosed source— Tribunal committed a serious error in arriving at a conclusion that items sold by the respective assessee were different from the jewellery declared under the VDIS - Tribunal fell in error by presuming that Assessing Officer had disputed the quantitative details of jewellery which was not the factual scenario, since the Assessing Officer had verified the details of the quantities returned and sold, which has not been disputed and obviously for the reason sale having been correlated on the assaying of the jewellery. - N.R. GANGAVATHI (HUF) V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2019] 311 CTR 625 (KARN)
Whether tribunal was correct and justified in law in arriving at a conclusion that items sold by the appellants were different from the jewellery declared?
Income from undisclosed source— Tribunal committed a serious error in arriving at a conclusion that items sold by the respective assessee were different from the jewellery declared under the VDIS - Tribunal fell in error by presuming that Assessing Officer had disputed the quantitative details of jewellery which was not the factual scenario, since the Assessing Officer had verified the details of the quantities returned and sold, which has not been disputed and obviously for the reason sale having been correlated on the assaying of the jewellery. - N.R. GANGAVATHI (HUF) V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2019] 311 CTR 625 (KARN)