9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the income disclosed by the assessee in the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act, the AO is required to consider the benefit of CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994 at the time of levying the penalty under section 271AAB. Such benefit of CBDT Instruction has to be allowed in respect of all the family members. Once the benefit is given as per the CBDT Instruction in respect of the quantity of the gold being 500 grams per married lady, 250 grams per unmarried lady and 100 grams per male member of the family, then the excess jewellery treated for undisclosed income will not survive. Accordingly, the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the excess jewellery without giving the benefit of CBDT Instruction No. 1916 is not sustainable. The same is deleted. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... undisclosed income offered to tax. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the ld. CIT (A) and also raised an objection regarding the validity of initiation of proceedings, however, could not succeed. 3. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee has submitted that the AO while issuing the show cause notice dated 14.12.2016 has not specified under which limb of the provisions of section 271AAB(1) the penalty was sought to be levied. The AO has only mentioned the penalty under section 271AAB in the show cause notice which does not satisfy the requirement of law. The ld. A/R has referred to the show cause notice and submitted that it is evident that the said notice was issued in a casual manner without specifying the limb/clause of section 271AAB(1) of the Act which is applicable in the case of the assessee. Therefore, the AO failed to make the assessee known the ground which the assessee has to meet and consequently the principles of natural justice is violated. The ld. A/R has further submitted that another show cause notice dated 15.05.2017 was also issued by the AO which is identical to the notice dated 14.12.2016 except the change of date. Therefore, both the notices is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has duly filed his reply to the show cause notice and claimed that since the assessee has already declared the said income in the return of income filed under section 139(1) of the Act and accordingly not entitled to immunity from the levy of penalty under section 271AAB. The assessee in his reply referred to the provisions of section 271AAB(1)(a) of the Act and thus no prejudice was caused to the assessee if specific clause has not been mentioned in the show cause notice issued by the AO. The ld. D/R has further submitted that the AO has finally levied the penalty under section 271AAB(1)(a) of the Act and, therefore, the definite finding is given by the AO while passing the penalty order. He has further contended that the assessee has surrendered the undisclosed business income in his statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act and also reiterated the same stand in the affidavit filed by the assessee subsequently. The ld. D/R has relied upon the decision dated 5th April, 2018 of Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of R. Elangovan in ITA No.1199/CHNY/2017. He has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in case of PCIT vs. Sandeep Chandak, 405 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness of the nature of default attracting the levy of penalty under section 271AAB. It is not the case of the assessee that the disclosure was taken under coercion and further the assessee has offered the said amount to tax in the return of income which rules out the scope of any pressure or coercion by the search team for taking disclosure from the assessee. Thus the objection raised by the assessee that the AO has not specified the clause under section 271AAB(1) of the Act has no merit when the assessee himself has explained the nature of income disclosed and surrendered and also paid the tax on the same. The ld. D/R has submitted that as per the explanatory note of Finance Bill, 2012, the provisions of section 271AAB are mandatory in nature and the AO has no discretion but the assessee shall pay the penalty in addition to the tax on the undisclosed income surrendered under section 132(4) of the Act. He has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. There was a search and seizure action in the case of the assessee on 11.03.2015. As per the seized material Exhibit 2 Annexure AS, a pocket diar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 132 conducted on 4th September, 2013, the assessee disclosed income of ₹ 5,01,66,717/- in his statement made under section 132(4) of the Act. The said disclosure was made in pursuant to the entries in the seized documents. The details of the undisclosed income surrendered by the assessee are as under :- a) Unexplained expenditure on house construction 2,44,63,575/- b) Undisclosed stock 1,91,24,877/- c) Undisclosed jewellery 60,16,265/- d) Undisclosed debtors/advances 5,62,000/- Total : 5,01,66,717/- It is pertinent to note that the disclosure of additional income in the statement recorded under section 132(4) itself is not sufficient to levy the penalty under section 271AAB of the Act until and unless the income so disclosed by the assessee falls in the definition of undisclosed income defined in the explanation to section 271AAB(1) of the Act. Therefore, the question whether the income disclosed by the assessee is undisclosed income in terms of the definition under section 271AAB of the Act has to be considered and decided in the penalty proceedings. Since the assessee has offered the said income in the return of income filed under section 139(1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not conducted on 30th October, 2014. Further, the entries in the diary itself do no not represent the income of the assessee during the year under consideration though the assessee was required to explain the source of investment in question and that source would be the income of the assessee. It is most likely that the investment in question was made from the unaccounted income of preceding years. Hence the investment in the real estate itself would not reveal the nature of income and the source of income of the year under consideration. It is a pre-condition for invoking the provisions of section 271AAB that the assessee admitted the undisclosed income in the statement under section 132(4). The definition of 'undisclosed income' is provided in section 271AAB itself and, therefore, the AO in the proceedings under section 271AAB has to examine all the facts of the case and then arrive to the conclusion that the income disclosed by the assessee falls in the definition of undisclosed income as stipulated in the explanation to said section. The first question arises is whether the levy of penalty under section 271AAB is mandatory and consequential to the disclosure of income by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax, if any, payable by him,- (a) a sum computed at the rate of thirty per cent of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year, if the assessee- (i) in the course of the search, in a statement under sub-section (4) of section 132, admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived; (ii) substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived; and (iii) on or before the specified date- (A) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income; and (B) furnishes the return of income for the specified previous year declaring such undisclosed income therein; (b) a sum computed at the rate of sixty per cent of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year, if it is not covered under the provisions of clause (a).] (2) No penalty under the provisions of 53[section 270A or] clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1) 52[or sub-section (1A)]. (3) The provisions of sections 274 and 275 shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to the penalty referred to in this section. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the assessee. It is statutory requirement that the explanation of the assessee for not fulfilling the conditions as prescribed u/s 271AAB of the Act is required to be considered by the AO and particularly whether the explanation furnished by the assessee is bonafide and non-compliance of the same is due to the reason beyond the control of the assessee. Therefore, the penalty u/s 271AAB is not a consequential act but the AO has to first initiate proceedings by issuing a show cause notice and after considering the explanation and reply of the assessee has to take a decision. This requirement of giving an opportunity of hearing itself makes it clear that the penalty u/s 271AAB is not mandatory but the AO has to take a decision based on the facts and circumstances of the case otherwise there is no requirement of issuing any notice for initiation of proceedings but the levy of penalty would be consequential and only computation of the quantum was to be done by the AO as in the case of levy of interest and fee u/s 234A to E. Even the quantum of penalty leviable u/s 271AAB is also subject to the condition prescribed under clauses (a) to (c) of sub-section (1) and the AO has to agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s seen that the ld. A.R is correct in observing that the section of penalty has not been correctly mentioned by the AO in the caption. However, the AO will get the benefit of section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 because firstly, the assessee has raised no objection before the AO in this regard. Secondly, last line of the notice clearly mentions section 271AAB. Thirdly, the assessee has given reply to said notice which shows that the assessee fully comprehended the implication of the notice that it is for section 271AAB. The assessee has also challenged that the principles of natural justice has not followed by the AO. The detailed submissions of A.R in this regard has already been reproduced above. The A.R did not produce any evidence to show that he was not given proper opportunity of hearing. It is clear from the penalty order that the AO has given penalty notice and which was also replied by the assessee. Therefore, in my opinion, principle of natural justice has not been violated. Thus in view of above discussion penalty imposed by AO u/s 271AAB of the Act is confirmed." Thus it was found by the Hon'ble High Court that the mistake in mentioning the section in the sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate of ten per cent of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year, if such assessee- (i) in the course of search, in a statement under sub-section (4) of section 132, admits the undisclosed income and specifies the manner in which such income has been derived. (ii) Substantiates the manner in which the undisclosed income was derived; and (iii) On or before the specified date- (A) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income; and (B) furnishes the return of income for the specified previous year declaring such undisclosed income therein; (b) a sum computed at the rate of twenty per cent of the undisclosed income of the specified previous year, if such assessee- (i) in the course of the search, in a statement under sub-section (4_) of section 132, does not admit the undisclosed income; and (ii) on or before the specified date- (A) declares such income in the return of income furnished for the specified previous year; and (B) pays the tax, together with interest, if any, in respect of the undisclosed income; (c) a sum which shall not be less than thirty per cent but which shall not exceed ninety per cent of the und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e unless the assessee has been heard or has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Therefore, from plain reading of section 271AAB of the Act, it is evident that the penalty cannot be imposed unless the assessee is given a reasonable opportunity and assessee is being heard. Once the opportunity is given to the assessee, the penalty cannot be mandatory and it is on the basis of the facts and merits placed before the A.O. Once the A.O. is bound by the Act to hear the assessee and to give reasonable opportunity to explain his case, there is no mandatory requirement of imposing penalty, because the opportunity of being heard and reasonable opportunity is not a mere formality but it is to adhere to the principles of natural justice. Hon'ble A.P. High Court in the case of Radhakrishna Vihar in ITTA No.740/2011 while dealing with the penalty u/s 158BFA held that 'we are of the opinion that while the words shall be liable under sub section (1) of section 158BFA of the Act that are entitled to be mandatory, the words may direct in sub section 2 there of intended to directory'. In other words, while payment of interest is mandatory levy of penalty is discretionary. It is trite p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot recorded the undisclosed income in the books of accounts or in the other documents / record maintained in normal course relating to specified previous year, the show cause notice shall also specify the default committed by the assessee to attract the penalty @ 10% or 20% or 30% of the undisclosed income. There is no dispute that the AO has not specified the default and charge against the assessee which necessitated the levy of penalty under section 271AAB of the Act. Consequently, the assessee was not given an opportunity to explain his case for specific default attracting the levy of penalty in terms of clauses (a) to (c) of section 271AAB(1) of the Act. The Channai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Shri R. Elangovan (supra) at pages 7 to 10 has held as under :- " It is clear from the Sub Section (3) of Section 271 AAB that Sections 274 and Section 275 of the Act shall, so far as may be, apply. Sub Section (1) of Section 274 of the Act mandates that order imposing penalty has to be imposed only after hearing the assessee or giving a assessee opportunity of hearing. Opportunity that is to be given to the assessee should be a meaningful one and not a farce. Notice i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Court, we are of the opinion, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for determination by this Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed''. In the earlier case of Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra) their lordship had observed as under:- ''Notice under section 274 of the Act should specifically state the grounds mentioned in section 271(1)(c), i.e., whether it is for concealment of income or for furnishing of incorrect particulars of income. Sending printed form where all the grounds mentioned in section 271 are mentioned would not satisfy the requirement of law ; The assessee should know the grounds which he has to meet specifically. Otherwise, the principles of natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee ; ) taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law ; penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings : though proceedings for imposition of penalty emanate from proceedings of assessment, they are independent and a separate aspect of the proceedings ; The findings recorded in the assessment proceedings in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o avail yourself of this opportunity of being heard in person or through Authorized Representative, you may reply to show cause in writing on or before the said date which will be considered before any such order is made. Yours faithfully, Sd/- ( Sushil Kumar Kulhari ) Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. " No. ACIT/CC-1/JPR/2016-17/928 Dated : 16.08.2016. PENALTY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271AAB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. PAN - ABDPP 7196A To, Sh. Padam Chand Pungalia, 2372, MSB Ka Rasta, Johari Bazar, Jaipur. Whereas in the course of assessment proceedings before me for the A.Y. 2014-15, it appears to me that as per sections 274 and 275 read with section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act you are liable for penalty on assessed undisclosed income. You are hereby requested to appear before me at my office Room No. 103 (NA), N.C.R.B., Jaipur at 11.00 A.M. on 25.08.2016 and show cause why an order imposing penalty on you should not be made u/s 271AAB r.w.s. 274 of the Income tax Act, 1961. If you do not wish to avail yourself of this opportunity of being heard in person or through Authorized Representative, you may reply to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court in the case of Sheveta Constructions Pvt. Ltd. dated 06.12.2016 in DBIT Appeal No. 534/2008 as well as other decisions as relied upon by the ld. A/R of the assessee. We find that the show cause notices issued by the AO in the case before us are identical as in the case of Shri Padam Chand Pungliya. For ready reference, we reproduce the show cause notice dated 15.05.2017 which is identical to the show cause notice dated 14.12.2016 as under :- "NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTION 271 READ WITH SECTION 271AAB OF THE INCOME -TAX ACT, 1961. Date : 15-05-2017. To, Name M/s/Shri/Smt. Mukund Sharan Goyal Address 303, "Awadh", Nemisagar Colony, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. PAN ABIPG 1414D Whereas in the course of assessment proceedings for the AY 2015-16 penalty proceeding were initiated u/s 274 and 275 read with the section u/s 271AAB of the IT Act and a penalty notice was issued accordingly. You are hereby allowed further opportunity of being heard and to show cause why an order imposing penalty on you should not be made u/s 271AAB of the Income-tax Act 1961. If you do not wish to avail yourself of this opportunity of being heard in person or through Authorized ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, then the AO is duty bound to first hold that the income disclosed by the assessee is undisclosed income as per the provisions of section 271AAB and then take a decision of imposing the penalty. He has referred to the relevant disclosure made by the assessee in the statement recorded under section 132(4) and submitted that it is a clear case of obtaining the disclosure from the assessee without any incriminating material disclosing any undisclosed income. The alleged seized material are nothing but containing some imaginary names and details and some figures which were specifically stated by the assessee in his statement. The ld. A/R has thus contended that the said seized documents are nothing but dumb and deaf papers without indicating any undisclosed income of the assessee. The assessee has surrendered the income just to buy peace and avoid unnecessary litigation, however, there is no iota of evidence that the surrendered income was undisclosed income of the assessee. All the entries in the seized documents are written against some imaginary names and figures and do not represent any actual transaction but only for sake of obtaining the surrender from the assessee, the search ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunch of dumb written papers. Further the officers of search proceedings and the AO also accepted that the same are dumb written names, places and figures as no further enquiry/investigation was made. The surrender of current years income by assessee of ₹ 24,58,50,000/- was just to buy peace by assessee which also he categorically stated in statement u/s 132(4). Thus it is only by admission of assessee under undue pressure by the search team on which the assessee included the said amount in return filed as his income of current year and paid tax thereon. There is no iota of evidence that surrendered income was undisclosed income. The revenue authorities have exerted undue pressure and obtained the surrender of income from the assessee. From the assessment order it is clear that the assessee has maintained a separate diary for the income surrendered during the course of search. The diary was also maintaining as books of accounts. In this diary all the entries are for the current financial year i.e. from 16.01.2015 to 07.03.2015 and the date of search 11.03.2015. All the transactions are recorded. Nothing adverse was found which suggest that the assessee's intention was not t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that during the course of search total gold jewellery/ornaments of net weight of 4548.450 gms was found from bedroom of assessee. That total weight of gold jewellery/ornaments as per wealth tax return of assessee's wife Smt. Rekha Goyal was 4236 gms which also include 93 gms jewellery of M/s. Goyal Fashions Pvt. Ltd. (A group company). Copy of wealth tax return was filed during the course of assessment proceedings. Thus the excess gold jewellery of 312 gms was determined by the department. Out of said excess jewellery of 312 gms the credit of 100 gms jewellery was given to assessee as per CBDT circular and remaining 200 gms of jewellery valued at ₹ 5,19,125/- was offered by assessee as his additional business income in his return of income filed for the A.Y. 2015-16. In this connection it is submitted that the said 200 gms jewellery pertained to two grandsons of the assessee and sons of Shri Ashish Goyal i.e. Shri Ashutosh Goyal and Shri Radhav Goyal. It is submitted that the said jewellery items were personal items of the family members and holding is very old and reasonable looking to the status of family. The said items were received from both sides of relatives ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has been submitted by the ld. A/R that officers of the department did not make any further enquiries and there was no corroborating evidences. Suffice is to mention that the assessee on the basis of the incriminating material has voluntarily, surrendered undisclosed business income on account of such advances and the departmental officers are not required further to prove anything, as there is no such requirement in law. It is humbly submitted that in reply to question no. 31 recorded under section 132(4), it has been stated by the assessee that he was not having the addresses of the persons in whose names amounts were recorded in the pocket note book, found and seized during the course of search. Thus, if the assessee has not provided the addresses of the person to whom advances have been made for cash and for land purchase, it could be presumed that the revelations of their addresses could do more harm to him and it would not be in his interest. Now, the assessee cannot take the plea that no further inquiries were made by the department. It would not be out of place to mention here that in his reply to question no. 31 and 32 in his statement recorded on oath, it has been stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. It was further held that where offer of surrender of certain amount received as share application money was made by the assessee in view of detection made by AO in search conducted in case of assessee's sister concern, said surrender of income not being voluntary in nature, authorities below were justified in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, the ld. D/R submitted that in view of the above submission, it is crystal clear that the total undisclosed income declared by the assessee U/s 132(4) of the Act is squarely covered by the definition of 'undisclosed income' as reproduced above. Otherwise, it is difficult to comprehend under what conditions and situations, the income declared by the assessee would fall under the definition of 'undisclosed income'. He has referred to the definition of Undisclosed Income as per Explanation to section 271AAB of the Act. Hence, he submitted that the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271AAB of the Act may be sustained and the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 8. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. During the course of search and seizure action ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee during the statement under section 132(4) of the IT Act, only two items, namely, expenditure on house construction and undisclosed advances are based on the seized material. The other two items being representing excess stock and undisclosed jewellery are not based on the seized documents but these are based on the valuation of the stock as well as the jewellery found at the time of search and seizure action. First, we take up the undisclosed income on account of expenditure on house construction of ₹ 2,44,63,575/-, the relevant alleged seized document in this respect are the entries in the diary on 04.04.2013, 14.04.2013, 28.04.2013, 28.05.2013 and 01.06.2013. It is pertinent to note that all these notings are done during the month of April, one in May and one in 1st June, 2013. The construction of house is not a task to be completed from 1st April, 2013 to 1st June, 2013, that too when the alleged expenditure of ₹ 2,44,63,575/- was incurred in respect of various articles and construction materials. It appears from the seized documents that these are the notings on these 5 pages of a diary are done in one go, whereas the said notings are purported to be o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sset was a matter of fact at the time of search and in the absence of such asset either found or otherwise discovered during the course of search and seizure, these entries in the seized documents would not constitute undisclosed income on account of expenditure in construction of the house. Similarly, the entries in respect of advances of ₹ 5,62,000/- also very vague and ambiguous not giving any details about the purpose or date on which these advances were given. Only a date is mentioned at the bottom of the page but not against each and every entry of the page. Further, we note that the department has not tried to ascertain the full particulars of the alleged persons whose names are noted in the seized documents against certain amounts which are considered as advances given by the assessee. It is pertinent to note that without ascertaining the full particulars of the persons in whose names the entries are made, it is possible that all these names are only imaginary and not the names of any existing persons. Therefore, these vague entries itself do not represent the real transaction and consequently the undisclosed income of the assessee. The Coordinate Bench of this Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . We are also conscious of the fact that there are deeming provisions in terms of section 69 and 69B wherein such amounts may be deemed as income in absence of satisfactory explanation. In our view, the deeming fiction so envisaged under Section 69 and Section 69B cannot be extended and applied automatically in context of section 271AAB. It is a well-settled legal proposition that the deeming provisions are limited for the purposes that have been brought on the statute book and have therefore to be applied in the context of provisions wherein they have been brought on the statue book and not otherwise. In the instant case, the deeming provisions contained in section 69 and section 69B could have been applied in the context of bringing to tax such investments to tax in the quantum proceedings, though the fact of the matter is that the AO has not even invoked the said deeming provisions in the quantum proceedings. Therefore, even on this account, the deeming fiction cannot be extended to the penalty proceedings which are separate and distinct from the assessment proceedings and more so, where the provisions of section 271AAB provide for a specific definition of undisclosed income. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee and submitted that the jewellery already declared in the Wealth-tax return was excluded while computing the excess jewellery found during the search. Therefore, further benefit of CBDT Instruction cannot be given. 11. At the outset, we note that when the jewellery was found at the residence of the assessee and also accepted as belonging to the family members as the department has already allowed the credit of the jewellery declared in the wealth-tax return by the family members then the benefit of the CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994 shall also be given in respect of all family members. An identical issue has been considered by this Tribunal in case of Shri Vimal Chand Surana vs. DCIT in ITA No. 304/JP/2018 vide order dated 30.05.2019 in para 17 as under :- "17. We further note that there was a disclosure on account of excess jewellery found at the residence. The department has given the benefit of CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994 in respect of the assessee and his wife but the other family members of the assessee were over looked so far as the benefit of the said instruction of CBDT was concerned. There is no dispute that the family of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the said extent can be made. However, if the authorized officers or/and the Assessing Officers, find jewellery beyond the said weight, then certainly they can question the source of acquisation of the jewellery and also in appropriate cases, if no proper explanation has been offered, can treat the jewellery beyond the said limit as unexplained investment of the person with whom the said jewellery has been found. 13. Admittedly, looking to the status of the family and the jewellery found in possesssion of four ladies, was held to be reasonable and therefore, the authorized officers, in the first instance, did not seize the said jewellery as the same being within the tolerable limit or the limits prescribed by the Board and thus, in our view, subsequent addition is also not justificable on the part of the Assessing Officer and rightly deleted by both the two appellate authorities namely' CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal." Accordingly after giving the benefit of the CBDT Instruction No. 1916 and the status of the assessee's family, the jewellery found from the residence and locker of the assessee cannot be considered as excess of the normal possession of this jewellery. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
