Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 330 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained jewellery u/s 69A - purchase or gold and silver jewellery - HELD THAT:- In respect of 266.138 grams of gold jewellery purchased during the financial year relevant to A.Y 2012-13 amounting to ₹ 782,233/-, the assessee has come forward with an explanation that these purchases have been made on the occasion of marriage of his son, Shaurav Pareek and source of such purchases has been stated to be cash payment of ₹ 4,92,233/- and remaining through cheque. And we find that the source of cash payment has been reasonably explained by way of cash withdrawals by the assessee from his bank accounts around the same time when the marriage of his son was solemnized. Thus to the extent of ₹ 782,233 worth of gold jewellery, the same is taken as explained by the assessee by way of purchase bills and withdrawals/payment from his bank account. Regarding the remaining jewellery worth ₹ 136,631/-, we find that no sufficient explanation is available on record in terms of source of cash payment towards purchase of such jewellery. The disclosure of gold jewellery in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2016 is demonstrate of purchases made during the financial year 2015-16 relevant to A.Y 2016-17 in absence of anything on record that such purchases were made in the earlier period and thus doesn’t come to the aid of the assessee in terms of explanation of possession of the jewellery during the financial year relevant to impugned assessment year. Therefore, the addition to the extent of ₹ 136,631/- towards unexplained gold jewellery is hereby confirmed. Regarding silver articles, AO has recorded a finding that assessee has furnished no explanation and the ld CIT(A) has recorded a finding that the assessee has failed to explain the source of acquisition of silver articles. Before us, it has been contended for the first time that the silver articles weighing 3844.50 grams are supported by purchase bills seized during the course of search. As we have held mere purchase bills are not sufficient to explain the source of purchase of silver items where such purchases are made in cash and in absence of any explanation on record in terms of availability of cash in the hands of the assessee at the relevant point of time of purchase, such purchases cannot be treated as explained by the assessee. In the result, the addition made by the AO is hereby confirmed. Addition on account of undisclosed receipt u/s 68 - seized document has been found from the residential premises of the assessee and during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has contended that the said document pertains to his son, shri Shaurav Pareek which was however not accepted and addition was made in the hands of the assessee - HELD THAT:- Post completion of the impugned assessment proceedings, basis the aforesaid submissions of the assessee that these and other documents seized from his premises are related to his son, shri Shaurav Pareek, proceedings in the hands of shri Shaurav Pareek were initiated u/s 153C of the Act and in terms of notice u/s 142(1) referring to seized document under consideration the AO has stated that since the said documents pertains to shri Shaurav Pareek, he was called upon to furnish his explanation and submissions before the AO. In response, shri Shaurav Pareek submitted that the said document pertains to him and given his explanation regarding the entries found in the said document. There is thus a clear finding by both the Revenue and the admission by shri Shaurav Pareek that the said documents pertains to him and in such a scenario, the contention of the assessee has to be accepted that the said document pertains to his son and we therefore find that the addition, if any, where required as per law needs to be made in the hands of shri Shaurav Pareek and there is no basis for making addition based on such seized documents in the hands of the assessee. In the result, the addition so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed.
|