9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... course of search in his statement recorded u/s.132(4) and since no other evidence was produced before the CIT(A) or even before us, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) upholding the addition made by the AO. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) being a reasoned one is upheld and the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. - ITA No.1823/PN/2014 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2016 - SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM For The Assessee : None For The Respondent : Ms. Nandita Kanchan ORDER PER R.K.PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 25-07-2014 of the CIT(A), Kolhapur relating to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. This case was fixed for a num ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring the course of assessment proceedings it was submitted that addition on account of gold jewellery and silver articles should not be made. In support of his claim, the assessee stated that as per wealth tax return of Shri S.R. Mohite 626 gms of gold was declared. Further, out of the total gold found at 1962.050 gms quantity of 474.30 gms belong to his mother-in-law Smt. Nilima Mandhare. A confirmation was also furnished to this effect. It was submitted that in VDIS 1997 1031.128 gms gold was declared by the assessee. Further, 500 gms of gold belong to Smt. Monica Mohite as Streedhan as per CBDT Circular. 5. As regards the silver articles are concerned it was stated that 3 kgs of silver were declared in the wealth tax return of Shri S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts in support of his claim are not supported by documentary evidences. In the course of search and seizure operation assessee has himself offered 500 gms. of gold as undisclosed investment. Later on during assessment proceedings he attempted to retract from the disclosure. Total gold jewellery found was having net weight of 1962.050 gms. Assessee stated that 626 gms. has been declared in his wealth tax return. However, nothing is on record or was produced by the assessee to show whether these are the same items which have been found in search. Further, it was stated that 474.30 gms. belonged to his mother-in-law and her confirmation was filed. However, she appears to have no wealth tax return or any other evidence. 1031.128 gms. was stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on made by the assessing officer is hereby confirmed and the grounds taken by the appellant are rejected. 9. Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 10. We have considered the arguments advanced by the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. We find the assessee in his statement recorded u/s.132(4) at the time of search had offered an amount of ₹ 13,15,000/- as unexplained investment in gold jewellery and ₹ 6,10,000/- as unexplained investment in silver articles. However, during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee submitted that the same should not be added in view of the gold declared under wealth tax return, 500gms of gold belonging to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
