Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Rita Kumari, C/o M/s RRA Taxindia Versus DCIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi And Vica-Versa

2016 (3) TMI 113 - ITAT DELHI

Unexplained investments in jewellery - addition on account of variation in description of jewellery disclosed in the reports filed with the Revenue authorities - Held that:- As submitted that the assessee her husband and their daughter-in-law have been possessing jewellary in the preceding and subsequent years and have been always assessed to wealth tax. The fact remains that the jewellary found was much less than the jewellary disclosed in the wealth tax returns accepted by the Department and h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er strong it may be, cannot take place of evidence - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 5296/Del/2013, ITA No.5369/Del/2013 - Dated:- 12-2-2016 - Shri N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena A. Pillai, JM For the Petitioner : Shri R.S. Singhvi, CA For the Respondent : Shri Ramesh Chand, CIT, DR ORDER Per Beena A. Pillai, JM These cross appeals have been filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue against the order passed by the CIT(A)-Haldwani vide order dated 11.6.2013 in relation to the assessmen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

isallowance of ₹ 6,13,725/- made by Ld. AO is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not deleting the addition of ₹ 3,32,04,460/- fully as made by Ld.AO on account of alleged unexplained jewellery uls 69A and has further erred in sustaining the addition to the extent of ₹ 33,20,446/- (i.e. 10% of ₹ 3,32,04.460/- ) on account of remaking ch .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e been found as a result of search. 5. That in any case and in any view of the matter, impugned addition and impugned assessment order are bad in law, illegal, unjustified, barred by limitation, contrary to facts & law and based upon recording of incorrect facts and finding, without giving adequate opportunity of hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be quashed. 6. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Ld. AO in charging interest 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 9. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other. Revenue s Grounds of appeal ITA no. 5369/D/13 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) has erred in restricting the addition of ₹ 3,32,04,460/- made by the AO on account of unexplained investment to ₹ 33,20,446/- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and in law. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal. 2. The facts in brief are that a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in DS Group Cases. The assessee had filed her return of income on 14.9.2011 for the year under consideration declaring total taxable income of ₹ 66,69,100/-. During the assessment proceedings, the ld. AO made the following additions:- (i) Sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee must have spent money which could be unaccounted for. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us now. 5. The ld. AR in respect of Ground Nos.1 and 2 of the assessee s appeal submitted that, as the issue has been set aside by the ld.CIT(A) to the ld. AO for verification with certain directions, the same are not be pressed before us. Accordingly, we are not inclined to adjudicate these grounds. 6. We shall first take up the appeal filed by the assessee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, her husband and their daughter-in-law, which has been explained at paper book page 44 to 47. The ld. AR further submitted that these are accounted for and the assessee her husband and their daughter-in-law has filed wealth-tax return which is also placed at page 48-64, 65-71, 72-79, 80 and 81-86. On perusal of these wealth-tax returns, an amount of ₹ 7,73,97,015/- has been shown as the total value of jewellery possessed by the assessee, her husband and their daughter-in-law. 6.3. The ld. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iation in description of jewellery disclosed in the reports filed with the Revenue authorities. 8.1. It is observed that the ld. AO has made the addition without considering the latest report. In our view, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of weight of jewellery disclosed in the return, as it is a well known fact that Indian ladies keep changing the design of jewellery from time to time. Simply because the assessee could not lead any evidence for conversion or remaking of the jewellery, th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version