9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disposal. Facts apropos are that assessee a dealer in gold, diamond and silver jewellery had filed his return for the impugned assessment year declaring income of Rs. 46,43,263/-. Such income disclosed included a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs which as per the assessee was the value of excess jewellery found in a search held on 12.03.2012. During the course of assessment proceedings assessee was required to explain the source of gold jewellery of 1926.190 grams and silver articles weighing 69.5 kgs found at his residence. Assessee's wife had filed WT return in which 753 gms of gold and 5.4 kgs of silver were shown. Assessee's explanation was that he would be declaring it as unexplained investment and pay tax. However on 30.12.2013 assessee claimed cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .4 kgs declared by assessee's wife in her WT return was given and the balance of 64.1 kg was considered unexplained. The value for the 1,173.19 gms of gold was fixed at Rs. 30,43,254/- and for 64.1 kgs of silver at Rs. 32,69,100/-. Since the assessee had admitted a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs in the return of the impugned assessment year, balance of Rs. 33,12,350/- was brought to tax. 04. Aggrieved assessee moved in appeal before the CIT (A). Reliance was placed by the assessee on CBDT circular No.1916 (supra), for claiming credit of 1,400 gms of gold jewellery. However, CIT (A) was not impressed. According to him, the circular did not apply to the assessee since assessee's wife had already filed WT returns. Further Ld. CIT (A) noted that credit f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is that none of them had filed WT returns. Only person who had filed the WT return was assessee's wife and her name was not appearing in the list. AO had given credit for the holding of gold and silver jewellery mentioned by assessee's wife in her WT return. In our opinion, question whether circular No.1916 (supra) of CBDT could be applied for explaining the source of jewellery stands resolved in favour of the assessee by virtue of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ratanlal Vyaparilal Jain (supra). Relevant para 10 of the judgment is reproduced under : 10. Though it is true that the Central Board of Direct Taxes Circular No. 1916, dated May 11, 1994, lays down guidelines for seizure of jewellery and ornaments in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioned in the said circular. However, the circular allows only 100 gms per male member, 250 gms for unmarried lady and 500 gms for married lady in the family. The list mentioned by the assessee claims 200 gms each for himself and his son and 250 gms for the HUF. As per the circular what could be given credit for a male member is only 100 gms. No credit could be given for HUF, for the simple reason that an HUF cannot wear any jewellery by itself. In our opinion, the maximum relief that could be given to the assessee in addition to what was given by the AO was 950 gms, viz., 100 gms for assessee, 100 gms for assessee's son, 250 gms for assessee's daughter and 500 gms for assessee's daughter-in-law. Contention of the Ld. AR that status of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers of his family, relying on CBDT circular No.1916 (supra). AO did not allow any relief claimed by the assessee, but for the amounts disclosed by assessee in his return. In other words, he considered whole of 2,717.78 gms of gold, 27.88 kgs of silver and 4.2 carats of diamond to be undisclosed, but allowed relief of Rs. 19,20,000/- of gold jewellery, Rs. 7,50,000/- for silver jewellery and Rs. 60,000/- for diamonds, since these were reflected in the return filed by the assessee for the impugned assessment year. Addition made came to Rs. 60,31,937/-. 11. In the appeal filed before the CIT (A), assessee took similar arguments as made by his brother Vimal Kumar. In addition assessee also stated that 1,275 gms of gold, 12 kgs of silver articl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (supra) for explaining the source of gold jewellery, we are of the opinion that for three male members assessee could be given credit for 300 gms. Reasons for coming to this conclusion has been by us mentioned at paras 7 & 8 above, in relation to the appeal of Vimal Kumar. Coming to the claim for credit for gold, silver and diamonds reflected in the statements filed along with the return for A. Y. 2010-11 filed by assessee's wife, we find that silver articles of 12 kgs and diamonds of 6 carats mentioned by her in the said statements were the same which appeared in the net wealth statement as on 31.03.1992, filed by her along with her WT return for A. Y. 1991-92. However, against gold jewellery of 975 gms in the net wealth statement as on 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
