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

2013 (12) TMI 644

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Unexplained investment in jewellery – Held that:- The CIT(A) has granted sufficient relief to the assessee by accepting all the plausible explanations offered by the assessee - The assessee is again bringing some grounds against the confirmation of some quantity of gold jewellery as unaccounted, not on the basis of any evidence, but by way of pleadings – Decided against assessee. - ITA No.1359(Mds)/2010 - - - Dated:- 5-2-2013 - Dr. O. K. Narayanan And Shri Vikas Awasthy,JJ. Shri V. S. Jayakumar Shri Guru Bhashyam ORDER Per Dr. O. K. Narayanan, Vice President These are three income-tax appeals. Two appeals are filed by the assessees for the assessment year 2007-08. One appeal is filed by the Revenue for the assessment ye .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ened to help one Mr. Senthilnayagam, who was managing the Indian Oil Corporation's retail outlet at Mela Arasaradi, about 12 kms. from Tuticorin. The retail outlet was company-owned and company-operated and Mr. Senthilnayagam was working on a job contract basis. The assessee helped him to purchase demand drafts favouring Indian Oil Corporation to effect payments towards the cost of diesel and petroleum products and all the cash deposits made by the assessee were in fact moneys handed over by Mr.Senthilnayagam for the purchase of demand drafts. 6. The above explanations were not accepted by the Assessing Officer on the ground that Shri Senthilnayagam could have opened his own account for Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., where bank branches are .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ilnad Mercantile Bank Limited, which was the subject matter of dispute, were very much reflected in the books of account of the assessee. In the statement of accounts filed by the assessee alongwith his return of income, the savings bank account balances were also reflected. Therefore, there cannot be a case that the assessee has not disclosed these materials before the Assessing Officer. He has not suppressed any fact. He explained the reason why the amounts were deposited in his savings bank account. But, the Assessing Officer without making any useful enquiry, just made the addition by rejecting the explanations offered by the assessee. The most important point to be seen in the present case is that every cash deposit made in the dispute .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se of the assessee that no reasons are available on record for the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) to confirm the said addition as unexplained investment in jewellery. It is the case of the assessee that the jewellery was received by his family as a result of the family arrangement effected in the family of the assessee's wife Smt. R.V.Jansi. 11. We considered this issue in a detailed manner. The jewellery found at the time of search was 2151.190 grams. Out of this, 5 grams were allocated to assessee's wife's sister, as per the statement filed by her at the time of search. The balance gold jewellery worked out to 2146.190 grams. Deduction was given for the jewellery admitted in the wealth-tax return relating to one Mr.V.Vivian. This a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee Shri R.Vadivelrajan, for the assessment year 2007-08 is liable to be dismissed. 14. Next we will consider the appeal filed by the assessee Smt. R.V.Jansi for the assessment year 2007-08. 15. Just like her husband, the only grievance raised in this appeal by the assessee is that the Commissioner of Income- tax(Appeals) has erred in confirming 335.190 grams as unexplained investment in jewellery valued at Rs. 3,34,771/-. Similar issue was considered in the appeal filed by the assessee's husband. As in the case of assessee's husband, all the deductions were granted by the lower authorities in the present case also. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) has further allowed a deduction of 400 gram .....

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