9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he seized documents which was not challenged by the assessee at any point of time. Addition on account of low drawings made by the assessee for household expenses to the extent of 3,00,000/- are properly dealt by the CIT(A). X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 2,00,000 was seized by the authorities as no proper explanation was offered by the assessee. The assessee in his reply submitted that an amount of ₹ 2,77,200/- was found as cash out of which ₹ 2 lacs was seized and the balance amount was returned. In fact the amount of ₹ 77,200/- found was not seized in view of the same belonging to all family members and out of their past savings and accumulated income. According to assessee, in such a large family consisting of 8 members including very old females, this much of cash jointly belonging to all was quite reasonable and requested the Assessing Officer to accept the source and treat the same as explained. The amount of ₹ 2,00,000 which was seized from the assessee was part of total undisclosed income of ₹ 8,00,000 declared by the assessee relating to Assessment Year 2010-11 as per letter of declaration-cum-statement u/s 132(4) submitted by the assessee dated 7/9/2009 at the time of search. From the said letter, it was noticed that the cash of ₹ 2,00,000 was declared by the assessee in his statement recorded during search proceedings. As far as the matter regarding balance cash of ₹ 77,20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th. 4. The CIT(A) made addition of ₹ 77,200/-, as ₹ 2 lakhs has been surrendered by the assessee. As relates to jewellery of ₹ 39,37,792/- the CIT(A) held that in hindu custom gold ornaments are gifted during auspicious occasions. Instruction no. 1916 dated 11.05.1994 of the CBDT, which was also referred to by the assessee, relates to exemptions from seizure to some extent in respect of the family member. It does not however exclude jewellery found from being assessed if sources of acquisition are not satisfactorily explained. The Instruction mentions that in case of person not assessed to wealth tax, gold jewellery and ornaments to the extent of 500 gms. Per married lady, 250 gms. Per unmarried lady and 100 gms. per male member of the family need not be seized. It further provides that having regard to the status of the family and custom and practice of the community to which the family belongs, the officer may exclude a larger quantity of jewellery and ornaments from seizure. Therefore restricted the addition to the balance after giving the benefit of 1500grams and directed the Assessing Officer to work out value of jewellery after giving appeal effect. The CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITD 337 (Jodh.) Smt. Bommana Swama Rekha Vs. Asst. CIT 95 TTJ 885 (Visakha) Sint. Sulochna Devi Jaiswal vs. Dy. CIT 90 TTJ 974 (Jab) 6. The AR further submitted as relates to Ground No.3 that Ld.AO made addition of ₹ 88,900/- on the ground that assessee had turnover ₹ 68.89 lakhs on which assessee has declared income at the rate of 8% but section 44AD being not applicable, profit rates of 10% should be applied which comes to ₹ 6,88,900/- and since assessee has surrender ₹ 6 lakhs, the excess amount of ₹ 88,900/- was treated as unexplained income and which was confirmed by CIT(A). Case of the assessee is that assessee is into the business since last several years income from which was being shown u/s 44AD at the rate of 8 % and therefore the same percentage to be applied in the year under appeal. Even if it is assumed that sec 44AD is not applicable, the fact remains that the assessee was showing his income at 8% which was accepted also and thus in year under appeal also, same percentage of profit be applied, more so when there is no basis or evidences for applying higher rate of 10%. Next contention of the appellant is that assessee has made surren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to addition sustaining to ₹ 77,200/- out of cash of ₹ 2,77,200/- was properly explained by the assessee and there was case made out to the extent that there were several members in the family who would require the medical assistance at any time. The fact that ₹ 2,00,000/- was surrendered by the assessee should be in support of the assessee and hence the said addition of ₹ 77,200/- is allowable and AO as well as CIT(A) has overlooked the said factor. As relates to the Gold jewelllery the CIT(A) has rightly directed the AO restricting the same as to the balance after giving the benefit of 1500 grams only and while giving the appeal effect, the value of the jewellery may be worked out. As relates to the addition of ₹ 88,900/- on account of undeclared business income, the CIT(A) has justified its finding by stating that AO has come to the conclusion on the basis of the seized documents which was not challenged by the assessee at any point of time. The addition on account of low drawings made by the assessee for household expenses to the extent of ₹ 3,00,000/- are properly dealt by the CIT(A). Therefore, the appeal of the assessee in respect of grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
