9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jewellery found during the search action.Assessee had placed before the AO item-wise reconciliation of the articles mentioned in the wealth tax return, along with the valuation report prepared during the search No fault can be found with the approach adopted by the Tribunal with regard to the deletion of addition made by the AO qua jewellery. Besides the above observations, the Tribunal has also taken into account the fact that there were substantial withdrawals every month and also the income declared by the respondent/assessee. It is noted (something which is not disputed before us by Mr Kumar), that the returned income for the period in issue was Rs. 14.73 crores. Thus, as per contents of the wealth tax return, the Tribunal delete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 2004 could be made in the relevant period i.e., AY 2018-19. Tribunal noted, as indicated above, that the two valuers appointed by the appellant/revenue had estimated the worth of paintings differently and furthermore, had not pointed out any defect in the valuation report submitted by the expert appointed by the respondent/assessee. Tribunal concluded that insofar as valuation of artwork is concerned, experts could differ in their conclusions. Furthermore, given the fact that the valuers appointed by the appellant/revenue had not expressed any reservation with regard to the report submitted by the expert appointed by the respondent/assessee, the Tribunal held that the addition made with regard to the paintings was unmerited.Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 03.05.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, Tribunal ]. 3. The record shows that on 08.06.2017, a search and seizure operation was conducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, Act ] against the Minda Group at business and residential premises. 4. Insofar as the respondent/assessee is concerned, who is part of Minda Group, the search action brought to the fore articles such as jewellery, paintings and wrist watches. These articles were found at the residence of the respondent/assessee. 5. Since, according to the appellant/revenue, the source of the money concerning investment in the aforesaid articles was unexpl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the entire family lived in one residential premises as a single family unit. It also found that the jewellery declared/disclosed by the family as one unit in its wealth tax return was more than the jewellery found during the search action. 11.1 It was also noted by the Tribunal that the respondent/assessee had placed before the AO item-wise reconciliation of the articles mentioned in the wealth tax return, along with the valuation report prepared during the search. The Tribunal found that the AO was unable to flag any defect in reconciliation statement submitted by the respondent/assessee. It is the Tribunal s observation that a general remark had been made by the AO that there was a mismatch in the articles. 12. In our view, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the material placed on record and deduction drawn therefrom by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has taken into account the status, returned income of respondent/assessee as also the fact that the jewellery declared and disclosed by the family in its wealth tax return was more than the jewellery found during the search operation. 14. As regards the addition made with regard to paintings, what has emerged is that not only had the respondent/assessee placed on record a valuation report, but also the appellant/revenue had the paintings valued by two valuers. 14.1. The valuation arrived at by the two valuers appointed by the appellant/revenue were Yellow Flute and Delhi Art Gallery. Evidently, Yellow Flute valued the subject six paintings at Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent/assessee. 15.2. From this, the Tribunal concluded that insofar as valuation of artwork is concerned, experts could differ in their conclusions. Furthermore, given the fact that the valuers appointed by the appellant/revenue had not expressed any reservation with regard to the report submitted by the expert appointed by the respondent/assessee, the Tribunal held that the addition made with regard to the paintings was unmerited. 16. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal s approach, in the given facts and circumstances, cannot be faulted. Estimating the worth of an artwork can vary from expert to expert. 16.1. As indicated above, four out of five paintings were purchased, according to the respondent/assessee, in 2004; an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
