Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 239 - HC - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Unexplained jewellery found in assessee residence - petitioner has declared 101442.5 gms under the same VDI Scheme - HELD THAT:- It is noticed that prior to the consequential order the petitioner had made statement on to the effect that 1194.60 gms of gold out of 2034.1 gms of gold formed part of 101442.5 gms of gold declared under VDI Scheme, 1997. The consequential order that was passed pursuant to judgment [2019 (7) TMI 705 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] has not made any proper enquiry. There is no merger. The order of the Tribunal allows the Revenue's appeal. The High Court had merely remitted the case back to the respondent. Therefore, the decisions cited by petitioner are not relevant for allowing this Writ Petition. In the facts of the case, it cannot be said there is no merger as has been argued. Prima facie, the consequential order indicates that the said order is erroneous and is prejudicial to the interest with the Revenue warranting invocation of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as there is no proper reasoning and proper application of mind. Thus, there is no comparison between the case of the petitioner and petitioner's co-sister Shanmugapriya's case, who succeeded before the Tribunal [2016 (7) TMI 1529 - ITAT CHENNAI] for the same assessment year. There, the Tribunal vide its final order was of the view that when the assessee's mother-in-law late Smt.Prema had declared 3650 grams of gold jewellery under VDI Scheme, the Assessing Officer was expected to give credit to the extent of 3605 grams of gold in the hands of the petitioner's co-sister out of 6136.90 gms of unaccounted gold found in the hands of petitioner's co-sister. There, during the search operation 6136.90 gms of unaccounted gold was found in the hands of petitioner's co-sister. Out of 6136.90 gms of gold, 3650 gms was set off as that of the gold of her mother-in-law late Smt.Prema, who had declared the aforesaid grams of gold under VDI Scheme, 1997. In the present case, 2034.1 gms of gold was found at the residence of petitioner's son R.Sabapathy on 18.08.2011. Whereas, in the present case, the petitioner has declared 101442.5 gms under the same VDI Scheme, 1997. During the search operation in the petitioner's son's residence viz., R.Sabapathy's residence, where 2034.1 gms of gold was found is claimed to be 101442.5 gms declared by the petitioner in VDI Scheme, 1997. The High Court by its order [2019 (7) TMI 705 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] merely gave a fresh opportunity to the petitioner to explain the case afresh. AO has passed a consequential order on 29.10.2019 by stating that the case does not attract penalty since the additional income towards investment in jewellery was offered only to purchase peace with the Department. No case is made out for interfering with the Impugned Order,.
|