9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Dispute over addition of unexplained jewellery of gold ornaments. 2. Dispute over addition of undisclosed income for not filing return within due date. Issue 1: The assessee appealed against the order confirming the addition of Rs. 2,88,000 on account of unexplained jewellery of gold ornaments. The jewellery was found during a search and seizure u/s. 132 of the I.T. Act. The assessee explained the source of acquisition, including ancestral jewellery and gifts received on various occasions. The AO did not accept the claims based on CBDT Circular No. 1916 and determined the income at Rs. 6,72,000. The CIT(A) allowed credit for some jewellery but confirmed Rs. 2,88,000 as unexplained investment. The Tribunal, considering CBDT Instruction No. 1916 and previous decisions, held that the jewellery should be treated as explained, deleting the addition of Rs. 2,88,000. Issue 2: The second ground of appeal involved the addition of Rs. 24,96,525 as undisclosed income for filing the return after the due date following a search and seizure operation u/s. 132. The AO treated the assessed income for A.Y. 2002-03 as undisclosed income due to the late filing. The CIT(A) upheld this decision. The assessee argued that the income was properly recorded in books before the search, and the return was filed within the time prescribed u/s. 139(4). Citing a similar case, the Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, stating that the income could not be treated as undisclosed income under Sec. 158BB. The appeal was allowed, and the addition was deleted.
|
