9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 25-5-2018 - Shri G.S. Pannu, Accountant Member And Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member Appellant by : Shri Shailesh N. Doshi Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav ORDER Per G.S. Pannu, AM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-54, Mumbai dated 13.06.2016 for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In this appeal the only grievance of the assessee is with regard to the addition of ₹ 24,43,218/- made to the returned income on account of unexplained value of jewellery. 3. Before proceeding further it may be noted that the appeal has been filed belatedly by 20 days. The assessee has sought condonation of delay and it has been averred in the affidavit dated 02.02.2017, a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected the jewellery in the Balance Sheet attached to the return of income filed under Section 153A of the Act to show that the same are from explained sources. The AO notes that there is no wealth tax record nor is there any cogent reply to explain the source of investment. 5. Before the CIT(A) the assessee made detailed submissions and pointed out that in the course of search 580.900 gms of gold and diamond jewellery and 4 kgs of silver utensils were found. It was explained that the jewellery belonged mainly to two ladies, i.e. assessee s wife and assessee s daughter. The assessee also explained that he was married since 24 years and that and that his daughter was 21 years of age. The assessee referred to the CBDT Instruction No. 1916 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on can be sustained on that basis. To the same effect, the judgement of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Satya Narain Patni 366 ITR 325 was also referred to. Explaining the error on the part of the CIT(A) in relying upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of V.G.P. Ravidas (supra) the learned A.R. has explained that the case before the Hon'ble High Court was of an assessee who was otherwise a wealth tax payee and filing wealth tax return whereas the present assessee was not filing wealth tax return and therefore para (ii) of the circular is attracted. It is pointed out that the case before the Hon'ble Madras High Court was governed by para (i) of the circular, which is in respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s prescribed by the CBDT by its circular is quite justified. The only issue is as to whether the same would merit addition as unexplained in case, if assessee is not able to give concrete source of acquisition. Ostensibly, in the present case the assessee has not filed any wealth tax returns. The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Satya Narain Patni (supra) noted that the jewellery found during the search was within the limits prescribed by the CBDT circular and in the first instance, the jewellery were not seized, and it was held that no addition thereafter was justifiable. The facts in the instant case are squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Satya Narain Patni (supra). There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
