9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. Even otherwise the written submissions are better evidence over the oral statements. We therefore of considered view that the alleged transaction of purchase of land during Financial Year 2007-08 for consideration of ₹ 5,50,000/- and possession was taken during Financial Year 2007-08 only. Since the assessee has already declared her investment at the said land at ₹ 3,90,000/- (being 50% of ₹ 7,80,000/-), we find no reason to sustain the addition of ₹ 2,25,000/- in the hands of the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee Addition of Gold Jewellery 204.869 Gms, silver articles weighing 3.944 kgs and diamond jewellery - HELD THAT:- As regards the addition confirmed for gold jewellery 204.869 Gms is concerned we find no inconsistency in the order of Ld. CIT(A) who had given the benefit of 950 grams of gold (500 gms per married lady, 250 grams for unmarked lady (daughter) and 100 grams for male member (husband and son). Addition for silver articles - we are of the considered view that in the Indian customs at the time of marriage along with gold jewellery silver utensils/articles are also gifted which are given with the object for use during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be given for the alleged addition for on money payment. This claim was never made before the Ld. A.O nor before Ld. CIT(A). This is not a legal ground which can be taken at any stage by the assessee. During the course of appeal also no such specific ground has been taken for providing telescoping. We find no force in the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and are inclined to confirm the view taken by Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- for on money payments stands confirmed. Addition for silver article weighing 2.936 Kg found from the residence,1.270 kg found from locker and weighing 2.065 kgs found from another locker - HELD THAT:- In the instant case the quantity of silver articles is 6.271 Kg is likely on higher side. We therefore in the given facts and circumstances of the case and without setting a precedence for other cases and being fair to both the parties and in the interest of justice direct the revenue authorities to allow claim of 3 kg of silver articles/silver utensils to be a reasonable quantity of silver and thus delete the addition for 3 kg of silver articles. - IT(SS) No.43/Ind/2015 & ITA No.130/Ind/2015, IT(SS) No.47/Ind/2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the circumstances of the case and be deleted. 2. That the addition for Silver Articles 3.944 Kgs valued at ₹ 1,58,760/- sustained by the learned CIT(Appeal) be held to be unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and be deleted. 3. That the addition of ₹ 27,000/- for Diamond Jewllery sustained by the learned CIT(Appeal) be held to be unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and be deleted. 4. The appellant craves lead to add or amend any Ground of Appeal. 4. Briefly stated facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is an artist (painter) and derives income from salary, sale of paintings and bank interest. Her husband Dr. Niraj Kumar is a medical practitioner. A search was conducted u/s 132 of the Act on 02.06.2011 at the residential premises of the appellant and her family along with business premises of her husband. Simultaneous search and survey operations were also carried out on 02.06.2011 at various business and residential premises of Shri Sunil Bansal and Shri Anil Bansal who are engaged in the business of civil construction, real ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from referring to the submission made before Ld. CIT(A) also submitted that the actual purchase of the land happened during Financial Year 2007-08 when the sale consideration was paid and possession was taken. During Financial Year 2009-10 only the formality of getting the property registered in their name was carried for which registration fee of ₹ 2,30,000/- was incurred. Assessee has duly disclosed this investment in the property purchased during the Financial Year 2007-08 and therefore no addition for unaccounted investment should have been made. 11. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. A.O. 12. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Assessee s sole grievance is against the finding of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of ₹ 2,25,000/- for undisclosed investment in immovable property. We observe that the immoveable property measuring 0.24 acre land situated at village Khajuri Kalan was purchased by the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SI No.2284 along with other witnesses. In response thereto, letter along with various enclosures including her bank statement, detailing these transactions been filed by Smt. Rehana Praveen on 17.12.2013 requesting for exemption on date fixed of 19.12.2013 for her personal appearance' have also been submitted by the A.O. to this office. As per the submissions of the AO, the said letter has been placed in a separate folder along with other details for reference for any future necessary action. These details, as submitted by the A.O. in appeal, have been placed on records of this office also as well as assessment records of the A.G. Thus, AO's observation that the seller has not been produced nor any confirmation filed is not found correct. Also A.O. has made no further enquiry nor brought on any 'adverse material on record before rejecting these submissions, as made before him, in this regard. 3.4 Now coming to LPS-3, Pg No 42 and statement of Shri Neeraj Kumarappellant's husband. It is seen that while filling up proformas for initial/preliminary statement at the commencement of search operations, Neeraj Kumar has mentioned that his wife and mothe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e deed dated 25.03.2007 assessee has filed following documents in support of its claim that actual purchase took place during Financial Year 2007-08:- 1. Copy of agreement dated 24.07.2007 between Syed Hanif and assessee Page 15-18 2. Copy of agreement dated 02.06.2007 between Rehana Parveen and Syed Hanif Page 19-22 3. Copy of Kabza-nama dated 02.06.2007 executed by Rehana Parveen and Syed Hanif Page 23-24 4. Copy of Mukhtar-Nama dated 02.06.2007 between Rehana Parveen Page 25-29 5. Copy of Vasiyat-Nama dated 02.06.2007 executed by Rehana Parveen Page 30-31 16. The above stated documents which relates to Financial Year 2007-08 stands uncontroverted by revenue authorities at any stage. Genuineness of these documents is not doubted. Even in the registered sale deed dated 25.03.2010 the reference to the consideration of ₹ 5,50,000/- is mentioned which relates to the date of agreement 24.7.2007 when the seller received the sale consideration of ₹ 5,50,000/- from the assessee. All these set of documents are ascertaining the fact that the transacti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wn by the assessee. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and got part relief. 21. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 22. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and supported the order of Ld. A.O. 23. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Assessee is aggrieved with the additions sustained by Ld. CIT(A)for the undisclosed investment in gold jewellery of 204.869 gms as against 1154.869 gms of gold jewellery found during the course of search. In Ground No.2 assessee aggrieved that the additions sustained for unaccounted investment in silver articles weighing 3.944 kgs valued at ₹ 1,58,760/- and Ground No.3 for addition of ₹ 27,000/- for diamond jewellery. We observe that the assessee is wife of a Doctor and married around 15 years ago. On the date of search assessee has two unmarried children. Ld. CIT(A) after considering the CBDT Circular No.1916 dated 11.5.1974 partly deleted the addition for unaccounted investment in gold jewellery observing as follows:- 4.2 Appellant's submissions along with assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing 1154.869 gms has been found in case of the appellant, accordingly addition for 204.869 gms of gold jewellery and ornaments is found sustainable on this account. Further, addition made for 3944 gms silver, valued at ₹ 1,58,7601- and 1.5 carats of diamonds (₹ 27,000/-) is, also hereby, confirmed in absence of any satisfactory explanation in this regard during the entire course of assessment as well as appeal proceedings. A.O. is directed to value unexplained gold jewellery of 204.869 gms as per valuation report on his records along with silver and diamonds at ₹ 1,58,7690/and ₹ 27,000/- respectively while giving effect to this appeal order. 24. As regards the addition confirmed for gold jewellery 204.869 Gms is concerned we find no inconsistency in the order of Ld. CIT(A) who had given the benefit of 950 grams of gold (500 gms per married lady, 250 grams for unmarked lady (daughter) and 100 grams for male member (husband and son). We therefore in the given facts and circumstances of the case dismiss Ground No.1 of the assessee for Assessment Year 2012-13. 25. As regards Ground No.2 3 are concerned wherei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Counsel for the assessee requested not to press Ground No.1, therefore Ground No.1 is dismissed as not pressed. 30. Apropos Ground No. 2 Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that similar issue was raised in the case of Smt. Charu Gupta for Assessment Year 2010-11 for the alleged unaccounted investment in purchase of land at Khajuri Khalan jointly with Smt. Charu Gupta. The assessee has claimed that she along with Smt. Charu Gupta purchased the land at ₹ 5,50,000/- during the financial year 2007-08 incurred ₹ 2,30,000/- for registration charges. Total amount of ₹ 7,90,000/- was invested and 50% of this amount comes to ₹ 3,90,000/- stands duly disclosed as investment. Ld. A.O made the addition on the basis of value adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority. Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition to ₹ 14,27,000/-. 31. We however find that similar issue stands adjudicated by us in the case of co-owner Smt. Charu Gupta in para 26 above wherein we after considering documentary evidences placed before us ascertained the fact that actual transaction took place during Financial Year 2007-08 only and allowed assessees ground and dele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cles. When the matter came up before Ld. CIT(A) he gave the benefit of CBDT Instruction No.1196 dated 11.5.94 to the extent of 500 gram per married lady and confirmed the addition for un explained gold jewellery of 428.947 grams and 470 grams of silver articles. 37. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 38. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the locker is in the joint name of assessee and her son Shri Pankaj Gupta who lives with his family out of India and the gold jewellery found in the locker belongs to assessee, her son, daughter-in-law and children which received on marriages and auspicious occasions. Request was made of giving benefit of the CBDT Instruction No.1196 dated 11.5.1994 for the gold jewellery owned by Shri Pankaj Gupta and his wife Smt. Shailie Gupta. 39. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and supported the order of lower authorities. 40. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The sole substantive ground No.2 relates to the addition for value of gold jewellery weighing 428.947 grams and silver articles weighing 470 g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the addition of ₹ 98,000/- as undisclosed cash deposits in Bank be held to be bad and unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. The addition made be quashed. 3.That the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- as undisclosed on-money payment to Shri Shardendu Mishra be held to be bad and unjustified specially when there was no evidence to corroborate the statement of the said person. The addition made is requested to be quashed and deleted. 4.That in the alternative and without prejudice to the Grounds stated above the additions made be held to be highly unreasonable and excessive and be reduced. 5. The appellant craves leave to add or amend any ground of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the case. 46. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested not to press Ground No.1, therefore Ground No.1 is dismissed as not pressed. 47. Apropos Ground No.2 for the addition of ₹ 98,000/- as undisclosed cash deposit. Brief facts are that during the course of assessment proceedings assessee failed to explain the source of deposit of cash of ₹ 98,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He humbly prayed that the source of ₹ 98,000/- is duly explained therefore the addition may be deleted. 49. Per contra Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently argued and supporting the order of lower authorities. 50. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The issue for adjudication is whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in sustaining the addition for ₹ 98,000/-. From perusal of the record, we find that the cash of ₹ 98,000/- in the assessee s bank account in two parts at ₹ 49,000/- each was deposited on 10.4.2010 and 12.4.2010. The address of the assessee in the bank account is shown at Bhopal. Cash of ₹ 98,000/- is deposited at Satna, Madhya Pradesh. The claim of the assessee that the cash was received from sale of agriculture land at Satna is verifiable from the documentary evidence placed at page 16-26 of the paper book showing the details of agriculture land situated at village Satna in the name of assessee s mother Smt. Sudha Jain. Further it is claimed that the amount was immediately transferred to Smt. Sudha Jain is also verifiable from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. The issue before us raised by the assessee in Ground No.3 relates to addition of ₹ 2 lakhs for undisclosed on money payment. The land at Gram Borda was purchased on 7.6.2010 at a consideration of ₹ 2,44,000/- and was paid through cheque. Fair market value of ₹ 4,78,000/- was adopted by Stamp Valuation Authority. The seller Mr. Shardendu Kumar Mishra was summoned and on oath stated to have received on money of ₹ 2,00,000/- from the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- observing as follows; I have carefully considered the facts of the case the material placed on record and the findings of A.O. and also perused the case record. I have also considered the written submissions put forward before the A.O. The registered value of the property is ₹ 2,44,000/- and the breakup of the payment as claimed appellant is: ₹ 1,50,000/-- by cheque on 24.12.2010 ₹ 94,000/-- by cheque on 03.05.2011 However, the seller of the said property Shri Shardendu Mishra has admitted to have rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and on facts and be quashed. 2. That the addition of ₹ 1,70,288/- for silver articles 2.936 Kgs found from the residence of the assessee be held to be bad and unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. The addition made be quashed. 3. That the addition of ₹ 67,310/- for silver articles 1.270 Kgs found from Locker No.S- 223 at State Bank of India, Arera Colony, Bhopal be held to be bad and unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. The addition made is requested to be quashed and deleted. 4. That the addition of ₹ 1,15,640/- for silver articles 2.065 Kgs found from Locker No.153 at Kotak Mahindra Bank, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal be held to be bad and unjustified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. The addition made is requested to be quashed and deleted. 5. That in the alternative and without prejudice to the Grounds stated above the additions made be held to be highly unreasonable and excessive and be reduced. 6. The appellant craves leave to add or amend any ground of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
