9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal, Patna Bench Patna, in I. T. A. No. 102(Pat)/2006 pertaining to the block period from April 1, 1997 to April 24, 2003. A search operation was carried out under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act"), at Locker No. 1210D, New Delhi Vaults Ltd. on May 6, 2003 belonging to the appellant. Notice under section 158BC was issued on August 27, 2003 and ultimately the return in the prescribed form was filed on August 11, 2004 declaring the loss of Rs. 12,980. In the course of search, the assessee was found in possession of gold jewellery to the extent of 2740.230 gms. For the first time in a written submission dated April 14, 2005, in course of hearing, the stand was taken by the assessee that the gold and diamond jewelle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laim the benefit of her legacies of 1500 gms. of jewellery which she did not disclose in her statement filed along with the return. Accordingly, 618.530 gms gold jewellery was found to be undisclosed investment with effect from 2004-05 to the extent of Rs. 3,51,016. 2. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Patna, which was rejected. The further appeal filed before the Tribunal met with the same fate. Thereafter, the present appeal has been preferred before this court. 3. While admitting the appeal, this court has framed the following substantial questions of law : "(I) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the addition made on account of gold ornaments ostensi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isclosed the said gold jewellery as per their entitlement in their respective Income-tax returns, for which reliance is placed upon two of the returns, which have been annexed and were part of the paper submitted before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the time of hearing. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the amounts shown as inherited along with the quantum of jewellery shown in the regular returns filed by the family members, were clearly sufficient to explain the gold jewellery found in possession of the appellant and thus, there was no undisclosed investment having been made by the assessee. It is also the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the assessee was not required to explain assets co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to remain undistributed. It is also contended by learned counsel for the Income-tax Department that the fact that two of the brothers of the husband of the assessee had filed their returns showing approximately 300 gms. each goes to show that the same was on the basis of actual distribution of gold jewellery which had come in their possession. 8. It is submitted that if the return had been filed on the basis of notional share, each of the brother would have shown 1/4th share of the total jewellery left as the share of the family by the two elderly ladies which would come 444 gms. each, but a much less quantity of 300 gms. each approximately has been shown. 9. It is urged that in the said circumstances, since the evidence on the record di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been written, the total of which was Rs. 3,18,000 and the reply furnished by the assessee was not satisfactory which led to addition of this amount in the undisclosed income. The Tribunal while rejecting the explanation of the assessee had recorded as under : 'With respect to the addition of Rs. 3,18,000 also, we find that no specific explanation has been furnished before the lower authorities. The assessee has not denied the relevance of the amounts in question and, thus, the onus was on the assessee to offer credible explanation in this regard. The explanations furnished by the assessee on this count have not been found to be satisfactory and, thus, the addition has been rightly sustained by the learned Commissioner of Income- tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the Department unlike in the instant case when much later the stand has been taken by getting the affidavits from the brothers-in-law. 14. As a matter of fact, none of the figures given even in the belated explanation matches with the gold jewellery actually found in possession of the appellant. The clear stand in the submission of the assessee was that as much as 1500 gms. of gold jewellery by net weight was still lying with the appellant but much less gold jewellery have been shown in the returns filed by the family members of the appellant than what has been actually found in the course of search. A deviation between the same or inconsistency in the figures was for the assessee to explain and upon failure to do so, the explanation co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
