9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1312X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts. Proceeding further, the said jewellery was duly accounted for in the stock registers submitted by the assessee during assessment proceedings and the assessee produced documentary evidences in the shape of sales invoices, authorization letter issued by assessee in respect of goods to be delivered to the aforesaid parties, copy of issue vouchers for gold bars weighing 796.810 grams issued by M/s Swasthikas Jewelers. The stock of gold jewellery under dispute, upon release by judicial authorities, has been received back in the stock register maintained by the assessee and hence, duly accounted for. Lastly, the whole basis of making additions i.e. denial by the 3 parties as to placing any work order with the assessee, was never confr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 9, Mumbai erred in affirming the action of the AO in confirming the addition made u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act in absence of any notice issued u/s. 142(1) r.w.s. 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ), or warrant issued u/s. 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ), or assets / documents requisitioned u/s. 132A. 2. He failed to appreciate and ought to have held that no assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153 A can be made since the petition of DDlT(lnv), Tirunelveli was rejected by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Nagercoil and the assets seized by the police were released by the court. 3. The Respondent, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee and the same was handed over for onward delivery. Accordingly, the assessee was directed to substantiate the same. 2.3 The assessee, vide reply dated 10/03/2016 reiterated that jewellery was handed over for onward delivery to following customers of the assessee: - No. Name of Customers Grams 1. Shajahans Jewellers,Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu 3097.400 2. Pereppadanas Gold Park, Neyyattinkara, Kerala 1443.210 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccounts and the same was handed over by the assessee for onward delivery in regular course of business. 2.4 However, Ld. AO opined that the assessee failed to submit any documentary evidence or credible evidence to satisfy that 3 parties placed any work order of jewellery with the assessee. It was also noted that the 3 parties denied that the items in possession of Sh. Dhiraj Kumar belonged to them. In the above background, an aggregate amount of ₹ 186.18 Lacs comprising-off of gold jewellery for ₹ 183.18 Lacs and cash of ₹ 3 Lacs was treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 and added to the income of the assessee. 3.1 The assessee reiterated the submission before Ld. first appellate authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6.3.6. Based on these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case along with documentary evidences like the Court orders, confirmation by the purchase parties, confirmation by the sale party for having placed order in one case, etc, I find strong substance in the case of the Appellant Company as it was proved at the stage of criminal proceedings itself that the gold jewellery is not unaccounted. Further, as far as the source of such gold jewellery is concerned, I have also examined the sample letter placed in the paper book where the purchase party has confirmed having sold the gold to the Appellant Company out of which the impugned gold jewellery has been manufactured. Hence, the AO has fully verified the source of the gold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR, on the strength of documents placed in the paper book, submitted that the stock of seized gold was duly accounted for in the books of accounts and the conclusive documentary evidences were furnished by the assessee to substantiate the source of the same. 5. We have carefully deliberated on the issue. The undisputed fact that emerges from the record are that the gold jewellery which was intercepted by the Police Authorities under suspicious circumstances, has been declared by Hon ble Judicial Magistrate as belonging to Sh. Dhiraj Kumar, the possessor thereof which is evident from the orders of Hon ble court as placed on record. Nothing on record suggest that Sh. Dhiraj Kumar was not an employee of the assessee company and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
