9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1,21,500 and Rs. 1,94,927 made by the A.O. representing sale proceeds of artifacts and jewellery inherited by her from her father. 2. Besides the aforesaid ground, the assessee has also raised following additional grounds, which read as under:- "1. The learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the artifacts were personal effects & profit arising on sale of such personal effects was not chargeable to tax. 2. Without prejudice to the additional ground of appeal no.1, the learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the sale proceeds of artifacts of Rs. 1,21,500 and jewellery of Rs. 1,94,927 are taxable as capital gains u/s 45 and not as income from other sources." 3. Facts in brief:- The assessee is an individual having income under the head ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... last balance sheet, capital account, bank pass book or any other evidence, etc., in respect of her late father, to show that the assessee had inherited these jewelleries from her father. In response, the assessee submitted that all these documents are not available since her father died on the way back in the year 1974 and after a gap of more than 30 years, such documents cannot be produced. A copy of Will dated 6th February 1972, was produced, however, in such a will, there is no mention of bequeathing of jewelleries to the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer treated the sale proceeds of jewellery of sums aggregating to Rs. 1,94,927 as "income from other sources". 5. Even the learned Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the said addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late father dated 6th February 1972, however, there is no mention of any jewellery, but from the valuation report dated 7th June 1992, it can be gathered that her later father had a huge quantity of jewellery. Once it has been shown that the assessee's father was in possession of gold ornaments, then presumption can be drawn that such gold ornaments had been inherited from her late father, which have been sold in this year. Thus, no addition should be made. 7. As an alternative submission, the learned Counsel submitted that gold jewellery is a capital asset and if it has been sold in this year, then the same should be taxed under the head "capital assets" and benefit of indexation should be given. 8. The learned Departmental Representati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in this year, just to make some fictitious capital. Under these circumstances, insofar as the sale of artefacts are concerned, we do not find any reason to sustain the addition of Rs. 1,21,500 on account of sale proceeds of artifacts, under the head "income from other sources" and the same is hereby deleted. 10. With regard to the amount received by way of sale of jewellery, it is seen that except for valuation report of 7th June 1972, the assessee could not furnish any evidence showing that the assessee had inherited the said jewellery from her father. Even the Will does not mention any bequeathing of jewellery to the assessee. There is no rebuttle of the findings of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A) that the assessee could n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
