9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturned income for the assessee and the learned CIT (A) had erred in confirming the same. On the facts and circumstances of the case and the lad applicable, the addition as made/sustained was wholly erroneous both on facts and law and is to be deleted; & (2) that the interest u/ss. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act having been levied erroneously is to be deleted. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the issue are as follows: The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of pawn broking and money lending. A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in the case of M/s. Mangalchand Banthia and others on 12.3.2012 and, accordingly, the assessee was also covered by s. 132 r w s.153A during the search. During the course of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing additions on the returned income: (i) Unexplained gold Rs.57,59,120.98 (ii) Unexplained silver 12,54,000.00 (iii) Rate difference in gold 1,51,708.00 (iv) Rate difference in silver 2,80,000.00 Total Rs.74,44,829.00 4. Aggrieved, the assessee took up the issue with the CIT (A) for consideration. After having considered the assessee's submission and also reliance placed by the assessee on the (i) Board's Circular No.1916 dated 11.5.1994 and (ii) the ruling of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pati Devi reported in 240 ITR 727, the CIT (A), the CIT (A) had upheld stand of the assessing officer for the following reasons: "14. In the appellant's case also, a strong reliance on CBDT Instruction has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deleted; and - That in any case and without prejudice, the value as adopted for making/sustaining the addition is excessive. In conclusion, it was submitted that the authorities were not justified in making a huge addition in the hands of the assessee which deserves to be deleted. 6. On the other hand, the learned DR present supported the stand of the authorities below and, accordingly, pleaded that as there was no merit in the argument of the assessee's counsel, the assessee's appeal requires to be dismissed. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions, perused the relevant materials on record and also the reliance placed by the assessee on case laws furnished in the form of a Paper Book. It was the contention of the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s rejected. [source: Para 5(b) of the asst. order]. However, on a careful perusal of the Instructions No.1916 of the Board, we find that the assessing officer had not verified/examined to ascertain (i) as to whether the family members of the assessee were wealth tax assesses and if so, (ii) as to whether the gold jewellery and ornaments found during the course of search were excess of the gross weight admitted in their wealth-tax returns. For ready reference, the operational portions of the Instruction No.1916 of the Board are reproduced as under: "Instances of seizure of jewellery...................the following guidelines are issued for strict compliance: (i) In the case of a wealth-tax assessee, gold jewellery and ornaments found in e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ratanlal Vyaparilal Jain [339 ITR 351 (Guj)] on a similar issue, the earlier Bench had recorded its findings as under: "08. We are therefore of the opinion that assessee can always claim exclusion from undisclosed jewellery the quantum of jewellery mentioned 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 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 opinio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re-going paragraphs and in consonance with the (i) Instruction No.1916 of the CBDT; (ii) the findings of the earlier Bench of this Tribunal (supra); and (iii) the ruling of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court (supra), we are of the view that the issue should be restored on the file of the AO for fresh consideration as the details furnished by the assessee's counsel during the course of hearing before us as well as the break-up of 2100 gms furnished by the assessee vide his letter dated 11.4.2012 [Refer: Para 5 of the asst. order], it could not be ascertainable as to whether the ladies mentioned in the list for 2100 gms are married ladies or not. Hence, the assessee should produce details and evidences on this aspect and thereafter the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
