Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 617 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained expenditure - premium paid on life insurance policy - Addition u/s 69C - HELD THAT:- Assessee has duly filed three LIC Premium receipt of payment which are appearing at Paper Book Page No. 12 to 14 and same is also shown paid in cash and reflected in cash book placed at Paper Book Page No. 15. The disallowance so made is uncalled for, hence, same is directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Unexplained jewellery - Addition u/s 69A - HELD THAT:- Total gold jewellery with diamond studded therein of 321 grams were found as per inventory made during search belonging to the assessee. Nothing was seized during search. As per CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994, jewellery of 500 grams in the case of married lady member need not be seized. In the case of CIT v. Ratanlal Vyapari [2010 (7) TMI 769 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] observed that CBDT Instruction No. 1916 laid down guidelines for seizure of jewellery in the course of search takes into account the quantity of jewellery which should be generally be held by the family members of an assessee, and, therefore, unless anything contrary is shown , it can be safely presumed that the source to the extent of the jewellery stated in the Circular stands explained. In the case of the assessee only 321 grams of jewellery belonging to the assessee was found, which is less than 500 grams and same is inclusive diamond studded therein - the assessee has filed bills for purchase of gold of ₹ 2 lakhs and shown diamond jewellery in the balance sheet for the relevant assessment year. CIT (A) was not justified in confirming the addition on account of diamond jewellery. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|