9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (2) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the residence as well as from the locker: . Rs. (a) Jewellery at the residence including silver ornaments and silver coins 1,03,065 (b) Jewellery from the locker 51,297 During the course of assessment proceedings in the case of Shri Jawahar Lal Jain (since deceased) it was submitted before the Assessing Officer that whatever jewellery was found either at the residence of the assessee or on the person of the wife of the assessee or from the locker belonged to Smt. Archana Jain, wife of Shri J.L. Jain and was received by her at the time of her marriage about 22 years ago. No part of the jewellery was purchased either by Smt. Archana Jain or by her husband. The Assessing Officer did not acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his case in whole of the family jewellery of Rs. 1,54,362 was found which, in any case, does not appear to be unreasonable. In a business family the jewellery of Rs. 1,54,362 is not impossible. The lady got married 23 years ago when the gold price and silver price was not even 1/10 of today. Therefore, receipt of jewellery of about Rs. 15,000 before 23 years in business family cannot be said impossible. I, therefore, hold that whole of the jewellery belongs to the lady which is considered explained." He, accordingly, deleted the addition of Rs. 1,03,065 made protectively in her hands. Following his order he deleted the substantive addition also made in the hands of her husband. Aggrieved by the decisions above, the Revenue is in appeal be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at such jewellery can be used by the lady only. The assessee has been consistent in her explanation right from the day of search as it was explained that the entire jewellery found at the residence or on person of Smt. Archana Jain or from her locker belonged to her, which was received by her at the time of her marriage or on other ceremonial occasions like birth of a child. It was explained that neither Smt. Archana Jain nor her husband purchased any jewellery after their marriage which took place about 22 years ago. Relying on the ratio of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chuhar Mal vs. CIT (1988) 70 CTR (SC) 88 : (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC) he argued that in view of the claim of ownership of the jewellery which was in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Possession of jewellery of the nature described above raises a strong presumption that Smt. Archana Jain is the owner of the jewellery in question. The jewellery weighing 51 gms. was found on the person of Smt. Archana Jain. In addition jewellery weighing 315.500 gms. were found in a locker No. 12 in the Canara Bank, Loha Mandi,Agrawhich stood in the name of Smt. Archana Jain. The learned Assessing Officer has accepted the source of jewellery found in the locker valued at Rs. 51,297 as explained. Now the question for consideration is whether the Assessing Officer is justified in accepting the explanation as to the source of the acquisition of the jewellery found in search in part. At the time of search Smt. Archana Jain was questioned abou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g that to the extent of jewellery valued upto Rs. 1,00,000, the Assessing Officer should have accepted as explained. We do not find any merit in the contention of the learned Departmental Representative that the Board's instructions should not have been relied upon by the learned CIT(A) for holding the source of the jewellery as explained. The Assessing Officer has himself accepted the source of jewellery found in the locker as explained. The assessee's case is that she received the entire jewellery and silver coins at the time of her marriage and subsequently at the time of birth of her children. The factum of receipt of jewellery in marriage has thus been accepted by the learned Assessing Officer. In our opinion, acceptance of the explana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
