9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is daughter in law cannot be valued at market price when the CIT(A) has already considered the relief to the extent of Rs. 3 lac there is no reason to sustain the addition of Rs. 2 lac being the cost of diamond set and market value at the time of marriage. This set of fact supported by version of the assessee and his mother on affidavit we direct to delete the addition sustained by the CIT(A). With this observation the appeal of the assessee is allowed. - Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Judicial Member And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sh. Daulat Chand Singhvi, CA For the Respondent : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. DR ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal filed by assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jodhpur dated 15/10/2019 [here in after CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2012-13 which in turn arise from the order dated 29.12.2017 passed under section 143(3)/147 of the ITO, Ward-2(1), Jodhpur. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, in view of the written reply by the appellant to AO, the learned Appellate Authority gros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore; the AO made addition of Rs. 5,00,000/-in the total income of appellant. The appellant has disputed this action of the AO by contending that the appellant was not asked to produce any evidence in support of such a gift by his late father. Since the father of the appellant expired unfortunately on 06/01/2016. The appellant submitted the affidavit from his mother to supplement the appellant's claim. He further submitted that the source of expenditure is important and not that how the Diamond Necklace was bought, from whom the diamond necklace was bought. The possession of the diamond necklace as per the photo appearing on the bill and the possession of the bill are sufficient proof. Moreover, the set was bought for 3.00 lacs appearing by the initials of father of the appellant but the AO made addition of 5.00 lacs which is unwarranted. The appellant has claimed that Shri Johari Chand (late father of the appellant) had presented that gift to the daughter of the appellant. On perusal of affidavit submitted in the name of Smt. Jatan Kanwar Singhvi, Mother of the appellant and copy of the bill of diamond set, I find that the diamond set was purchased in the year 2007 and the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /13 at Rs. 5.00 lacs and the source of such diamond set was out of gift from my father. The learned AO made addition to my income for expenditure out of income from undisclosed sources to the tune of 5.00 lacs. Copy of Assessment order is annexed and marked as Annexure III. 1) Aggrieved by the order of the learned AO I submitted appeal agitating the various additions to my income by the learned AO. One of the grounds of appeal was for addition of 5.00 lacs being the estimated value of DIAMOND SET given to my daughter on her marriage on 09/11/2011. Kindly note that I have declared the estimated value in 2011 of a DIAMOND SET, purchased much earlier to 09/05/2011. 2) The said ground of my first appeal before CIT (Appeal) I, Jodhpur is discussed by the learned CIT (Appeals) on page 6 of the appeal order dated 15.10.2019 (Annexure II) At Para 6.2 of the appeal order, the observation of the learned CIT is made about said addition of 5.00 lacs. Last 5 lines of the said Para 6.2 is reproduced for your ready reference: I also perused copy of bill which was pasted by the AO in the assessment order wherein it appears that the father had made payment of Rs. 300000 against bill of Rs. 316617/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other, there should be no reason for addition due to expenditure out of unexplained sources. d) Simply with the time gap of 4 years from the date of purchase of the set and using it for giving to my daughter on her marriage the appreciation of value, that too, on estimated basis by me, cannot be the reason for sustaining the addition made by the learned AO. That on my application for rectification of the order the learned CIT (Appeals) Jodhpur in his order dated 06.12.2019 at Para (2) on one hand says it is not a mistake apparent on record and patent mistake but on the other hand he admits a mistake has crept in the order and reduces the addition to Rs. 200000/-. The observations are reproduced for your ready reference: the contention raised by the appellant that as the proof of purchase by the deceased father of the appellant was proved and accepted by the undersigned. Therefore, the entire addition of Rs. 500000/- made by the AO deserved to be deleted. The issue raised for rectification is not in nature of mistake apparent on record and patent mistake. In fact, these contentions are nothing but requiring the CIT (A) to review his own appellant order passed u/s 250 in appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned CIT (Appeals) have himself amended the addition to Rs. 200000/- on finding the mistake in the order. 12) That the learned CIT (Appeals) has cited the case law of Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Anil Goel vs. CIT (2007) 165 _____N 46 (Pun HAR). The case law cited by the learned CIT (Appeals) has got no relevance to the facts of the case. In the said case the rectification was sought as reasons for the order were not recorded. In my case all the facts are narrated by the learned CIT (Appeals) himself and he has agreed to the Diamond set being purchased by father in 2007 and gift of such diamond set to me in 2007. 13) It is beyond my imagination how an amount spent by my father for purchase of Diamond set in 2007 and gift of such item to me can be treated as expenditure out of unexplained sources in the assessment year 2012/13 14) That the appreciation in the value of any property after lapse of certain period cannot be made reason for addition to the income. That in my case the diamond set is purchased by father 9n 2007, gifted to me in same year and estimated value (not the cost) as declared by me in my statement before AO without any valid valuation report can g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
