2011 (9) TMI 61

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ard's instructions the jewellery of such a low value is not to be seized - Decided in favour of assessee. Unexplained investment in house property - there is no much of the difference between the valuation shown by the Assessee of these properties and valuation arrived at by the DVO. It is less than 10%. The CIT(A) and ITAT, in these circumstances, stated that when difference is between 10% to 15 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e cash and jewellery was found and seized. The jewellery found was to the extent of ₹ 12,12,891/-. The Assessee had submitted his explanation with regard to the jewellery vide letter dated 12th March, 2007. However, during the course of post search enquiry he stated that there was an excess jewellery to the tune of ₹ 2,52,021/-, which may be considered unexplained investment in purchas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are, therefore, of the opinion that no question of law arises on this aspect. 4. Second addition made was on account of unexplained investment in house property at KU-81, Pitampura and Godown at Bakoli. Here again, there is no much of the difference between the valuation shown by the Assessee of these properties and valuation arrived at by the DVO. It is less than 10%. The CIT(A) and ITAT, in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X