9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 710X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined as against 400 gms allowed by the Assessing Officer. Thus, in effect 284 gms of gold remains unexplained the value of which comes to ₹ 2,69,800/- i.e. (950 per gram x 284 gms). AO is directed to restrict the addition to ₹ 2,69,800/-. - Decided partly in favour of assessee. - ITA No.2284/Del/2016 - - - Dated:- 8-5-2018 - SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Vivek Bansal Shri Sanjay Goyal, Adv. For The Department : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR ORDER PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.02.2016 of CIT(A)- 3, Gurgaon relating to assessment year 2007-08. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted at the residential premises of the assessee, Smt. Manju Gupta on 07.09.2006. The assessee is the proprietor of M/s Royal Precision Works, Pandit Place, Tigaon Road, Ballabgarh. During the course of search operation, cash of ₹ 96,651/- and jewellery valued at ₹ 6,35,847/- were found from the residence of the assessee. Similarly, jewellery value ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer accordingly treated the remaining jewellery of 384 gms. valued at ₹ 3,64,800/- as unexplained and added the same to the total income of the assessee as unexplained investment in jewellery. 5. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee made elaborate submissions challenging the addition made by the Assessing Officer. However, the ld. CIT(A) instead of granting any relief issued an enhancement notice asking the assessee to explain as to why the excess benefit granted by the Assessing Officer of 600 gms. valued at ₹ 5,70,000/- should not be added to the total income of the assessee. Rejecting the various arguments advanced by the assessee, ld. CIT(A) finally sustained the addition on account of 400 gms. and enhanced the income by ₹ 3,80,000/- by observing as under :- I have gone through the assessment order and the submissions filed by the appellant and following observations are made:- ( i) The AO had made an addition of ₹ 3,64,800/- on account of unexplained investment in gold after treating 1200 gms of gold as explained in the hands of different family members and ₹ 40,000/- on account of unexplained investment in silver utensils. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds :- 1. That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law on facts in enhancing the income of the assessee by ₹ 3,80,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That in any view of the matter and in any case, action of Ld. CIT(A) in enhancing the income is bad in law and against fact of the case and beyond the jurisdiction of the Ld. CIT(A) to make such enhancement. 3. That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not deleting the additions of ₹ 3,64,800/- on account of alleged unexplained jewellery. 4. That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case and in any view of the matter and in any case, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the assessment order, passed without following the principles of natural justice, is bad in law and against fact of the case. 5. That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. charring interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No.1916 dated 10.05.1994 issued by the CBDT. He accordingly submitted that since the total jewellery found during the course of search was only 1584 gms which included the jewellery given by the mother in law of the assessee, no addition is called for. 9. Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 10. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A) and the Paper Book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. It is an admitted fact that during the course of search jewellery totaling to 1584 gms were found from the residence and locker of the assessee out of which the Assessing Officer accepted 1200 gms as explained which included the 500 gms belonging to mother in law of the assessee who was staying with the assessee prior to her death. We find, in appeal, the ld. CIT(A) did not accept the jewellery given by the mother in law of the assessee as belonging to the assessee and held that as per CBDT Instruction, the 500 gms allowable to the assessee will take care of such jewellery. He, therefore, accepted only 800 gms as exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Satish Goyal and batch of other appeals (supra) has observed as under :- 10. We have heard the learned representatives of both the parties, perused the findings of the authorities below and considered the material available on record. The first issue to be decided here is that whether the jewellery found during the course of search at the residence as well as at the bank lockers can be considered as jointly held by the family. It is an admitted fact that all the members of the family have maintained the same stance all through the proceedings that the jewellery is being held jointly by all of them. The statement of Shri Pradeep Goyal recorded as early as at the time of search is evident to this fact. The statements of two family members recorded at the time of search on bank lockers also point out to the said fact. The Assessing Officer in his order has nowhere denied the said fact, neither he has been able to bring on record any contradictory fact. If he was not satisfied with this submission of family members, he could have gone ahead and make further enquiries to figure out which jewellery belong to which member of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
