9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings warrant numbers 4537 and 4539 were executed on Shri Aditya Sharma and Smt. Sujata Sharma and Shri Aditya Sharma and Shri Neeraj Kumar on 15.02.2014 vide which Locker Nos. D-855 and G-2123, U & I Vaults Ltd. F-41 South Extension Part-I Ring Road, New Delhi were searched. During the course of this search cash amounting to Rs. 1,15,00,000/- was found and seized from the locker number D-855 which was co-owned by Shri Aditya Sharma and Smt. Sujata Sharma and cash amounting to Rs. 78,15,500/- and jewellery worth Rs. 10,91,868/- were found in locker number G-2123 which was co-owned by Shri Aditya Sharma and Shri Niraj Kumar. 2.1. Thereafter, in the case Sh. Niraj Kumar, the return of income was filed declaring an income of Rs. 1,85,400/-, whereas, in the case of Smt. Sujata Sharma, the return of income was filed declaring income of Rs. 32,64,510/-. Sh. Niraj Kumar is the brother of Shri Aditya Sharma, whereas, Smt. Sujata Sharma is wife of Sh. Aditya Sharma. Both the captioned assessees were issued separate notices u/s. 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and both the assessees were required by the Assessing officer to show cause as to why the cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n joint name but it was being operated by Mr. Aditya Sharma. iii. The statements of Mr. Aditya Sharma (assessee's husband) was recorded at the time of search in which Mr. Aditya Sharma accepted that this cash belong to him and received by him as an incentive for assisting his employer in meat business. iv. Mr. Aditya Sharma (assessee's husband) has also filed a settlement petition with income-tax settlement commission in this regard. v. Mr. Aditya Sharma (assessee's husband) had deposited total tax and interest amounting to Rs. 2,19,45,000/- on additional income surrendered for taxation amounting to Rs. 5,13,20,000/- during the A.Y. 2008-09 to A.Y. 2013-14. vi. Mr. Aditya Sharma (assessee's husband) had also surrendered this cash amount for taxation during the A. Y. 2014-15 in his name and accordingly deposited the tax stating additional income of Rs. 2,16,25,000/- (which includes Rs. 1.15 cr. Cash) for the A. Y. 2014-15. The assessee's husband had also deposited additional tax & interest of Rs. 86,85,000/- for the A.Y. 2014-15 on this additional income surrendered for taxation. The copy of revised computation along with tax deposit challan, which has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 143(3) of the Act, is bad in law and in facts. 2. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in sustaining the total addition of Rs. 89,07,368/- (Rs. 78,15,500 + Rs. 10,91,868/-) under section 69A of the Act. 3. That on the facts and in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in sustaining the addition of Rs. 78,15,500/- to the income of the assessee on account of cash found in locker (co-owned with his brother Mr. Aditya Sharma) by rejecting the claim of the assessee that this income pertains to Mr. Aditya Sharma. 4. That the same addition is made in the hands of the 3 persons i.e. Mr. Aditya Sharma (brother of the assessee), Mr. Niraj Kumar (assessee or brother of Mr. Aditya Sharma) and Mr. Moin Akhtar Qureshi (Employer of Mr. Aditya Sharma). 5. That on the facts in law the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in sustaining the addition of Rs. 10,91,868/- to the income of the assessee on account of jewellery by ignoring the factum of its holding and CBDT circular no. 1916 dated 11.05.1994. 6. That the grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other. 7. The appellant craves leave to alter, amend or add any other ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the additions in the hands of the assessee's brother Shri Aditya Sharma on substantive basis. The Ld. AR submitted that, therefore, since the impugned amounts, has been added on substantive basis in the hands of the assessee's brother, the same cannot be brought to tax twice and therefore, the addition in the case of assessee Shri Niraj Kumar needs to be deleted. It was also brought to the notice of the Bench that Shri Aditya Sharma had surrendered the impugned cash of Rs. 78,18,500/- for tax during the assessment year 2014-15 in his name and had also deposited the tax and interest thereon. Our attention was also drawn to copy of the ITR acknowledgement, revised computation and challans of Shri Aditya Sharma in this regard. 3.1. Regarding jewellery of Rs. 10,91,868/-, it was submitted that the same belonged to the assessee's mother and bhabi who had been married long ago. It was submitted that the jewellery found in the locker was only 339.20 gms which was lower than the quantity of jewellery mentioned in CBDT Circular No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994, which directed the tax authorities not to seize jewellery and ornaments found during the search to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hands of Shri Aditya Sharma on substantive basis instead of protective basis. Therefore, as per the settled law, the same amount cannot be taxed twice in the hands of two different assesses. Therefore, we have no option but to direct the Assessing officer to delete this addition. 6.1. Similarly, in the case of Smt. Sujata Sharma, we have gone through para 11.3.1 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 26.03.2019 in the case of Shri Aditya Sharma and we note that here also the Ld. CIT(A) has returned the finding that this amount of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- is to be taxed in the hand of Sh. Aditya Sharma on substantive basis instead of protective basis. Therefore, this addition has also been confirmed in the hands of Shri Aditya Sharma. Accordingly, there is no reason to bring the seized cash to tax for the second time in the hands of Smt. Sujata Sharma. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing officer to delete this addition also. 6.2. As far as jewellery of Rs. 10,91,868/- found in the locker of Shri Niraj Kumar is concerned, we have gone through the 'Panchnama' relating to the search of locker No. G-2123 which was co-owned by Shri Aditya Sharma and Shri Niraj Kumar and have also cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
