Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (9) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as the facts obtained in the case of the present assessee are entirely different and, therefore, has no application. (a) S. Mariappa Nadar vs. ITO (ITAT, Madras Bench 'A') [(1984) 19 TTJ (Mad) 431] (b) Pratiba Rani vs. Suraj Kumar Anr. (1985) 49 CTR (SC) 318 : (1986) 155 ITR 190 (SC); (c) Kusumlatha vs. CIT (1989) 180 ITR 365 (Raj); (d) Kusumlatha Singhal vs. CIT (1990) 86 CTR (SC) 173 : (1990) 185 ITR 56 (SC); and (e) ITO vs. Mathurdas Motichand (1993) 47 TTJ (Ahd) 488 : 78 Taxman 285 (Ahd). (4) The learned CIT(A)'s observation [vide para 4(i) of the appellate order] that the declaration made by assessee 'looks as if superimposed' is unwarranted and is against facts. The Hon'ble Tribunal had occasion to consider such m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rged at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the CIT(A) may be cancelled and that of the AO restored." 2.The facts, as brought out by the order of the CIT(A), are that the business premises of M/s Devi Silks and others were searched between 9th October and 28th Nov., 1990. There was no warrant permitting search in the assessee's case. However, on a search of the bedroom of the assessee, 660.725 gms. of gold jewellery of which 466.725 gms. of jewellery were seized despite the fact that there was no warrant in the name of the assessee. The seizure was not effected in the hands of the husband. The seizure, however, was made in the hands of the assessee's brother-in-law because the warrant was in his name. 3. The submission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m and she had given some jewellery of hers to his daughter. It was further stated the assessee received from her mother jewellery and what was received from her was her 'Streedhan' and it was returned under s.132(5) of the Act on 18th Jan., 1991. 5. The CIT(A) had noted the above and also had noted that the declaration of 19th Oct., 1990 was signed by the assessee in English. He considered the submissions of the assessee that she was made to sign the declaration. The submission as to the effect that the search was in the name of the brother-in-law of the assessee was also noted by the CIT(A). 6. The CIT(A) came to the conclusion that the various evidence, as indicated by the assessee, would go to show that the father of the assessee h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates