TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee and under these facts, in my considered opinion, the addition made by the Assessing Officer without bringing any cogent adverse material on record, is not sustainable. Addition on jewellery found - search and seizure - Held that:- It is noted by the Assessing Officer in Para 5 of the assessment order that the jewellery found from the room of Smt. Radhika Dalmia and Shri Ashish Dalmia during the course or search was 420 gms. Gold jewellery and 6.90 Ct. precious stones and silver utensils 4 Kg. total value at ₹ 7,91,280/-. The Assessing Officer accepted the gold jewellery but made addition of ₹ 97,200/- being value of precious and semi precious stone of 6.90 Ct. and also value of silver utensils of 4 Kg. valued at ₹ 1,26,000/-. It was submitted by Shri Anand Kumar Dalmia, father of the assessee, that although all these items were found in the bedroom of Shri Ashish Dalmia and his wife Smt. Radhika Dalmia but no addition was made in the hands of Smt. Radhika Dalmia. He submitted a copy of the assessment order in the case of Smt. Radhika Dalmia in support of this contention. In my considered opinion, total jewellery and silver utensils of ₹ 7,91,280/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w and on facts and merely on estimated basis. 3. In course of hearing, Shri Anand Kumar Dalmia, Karta of the assessee Shri Anand Kumar Dalmia HUF appeared and he was heard. 4. Learned D. R. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. I have considered the rival submissions. I find that as per various grounds raised by the assessee, there are only two grievances of the assessee i.e. regarding confirming of the addition of ₹ 1.20 lac on account of fooding expenses and ₹ 50,000/- on account of rent of banquet hall. As per the facts noted in the assessment order, a search seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted in Pan Bahar and Wah Gutka group of cases at Delhi and Kanpur on 28/01/2011 and simultaneously, search was also conducted in the residential premises of Shri Anand Kumar Dalmia. Consequent to this, the present assessment has been framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) read with section 153 C of the Act. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has observed that in course of search, papers in connection with the marriage expenses of Shri Ashish Kumar Dalmia, a co-parcener of this HUF were found. In this regard, h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause the marriage was of the son of the assessee and not of his daughter. I find force in this submission of the assessee. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has mentioned that evidence was found in course of search in the form of details of refreshment, lunch, dinner etc. but this is not sufficient to make addition because even in the case of marriage of the son, the details are agreed by both the sides but it is customary that the expenses are generally incurred by the bride side. The Assessing Officer has not examined the bride side before coming to this conclusion that the expenses are incurred by the assessee and not by the bride side. Apart from list of refreshment, lunch, dinner etc., there is no other mention of any evidence which could show that the expenses were incurred by the assessee and under these facts, in my considered opinion, the addition made by the Assessing Officer without bringing any cogent adverse material on record, is not sustainable. Hence, the same is deleted. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. 7. Now I take up the second appeal in the case of Shri Anand Kumar Dalmia HUF for assessment year 2011-12 in I.T.A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9;s wife Smt Radhika Dalmia and which is accepted and considered by the assessing officer. 4. Any addition in income on estimation basis on account of investment in jewellery by the Assessing Officer beyond the value of jewellery ₹ 7,91,280/= found in search operation is contrary to Law. 5. Because the order is bad in Law and on facts merely based on estimation. 10. Shri Anand Kumar Dalmia, father of Shri Ashish Dalmia appeared and made submissions. He was heard. 11. Learned D. R. of the Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 12. I have considered the rival submissions and gone through the orders of the authorities below. I find that it is noted by the Assessing Officer in Para 5 of the assessment order that the jewellery found from the room of Smt. Radhika Dalmia and Shri Ashish Dalmia during the course or search was 420 gms. Gold jewellery and 6.90 Ct. precious stones and silver utensils 4 Kg. total value at ₹ 7,91,280/-. The Assessing Officer accepted the gold jewellery but made addition of ₹ 97,200/- being value of precious and semi precious stone of 6.90 Ct. and also value of silver utensils of 4 Kg. valued at ₹ 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Niva Dalmia from parents of Niva Dalmia and other friends and relatives on the occasion of their marriage on 18/11/2010. In my considered opinion, receipt of this much jewellery from parents of bride and other friends and relatives on the occasion of marriage is very reasonable and no addition should be made out of this small amount of jewellery found in possession of a married couple. The Assessing Officer has made addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- out of which CIT(A) has allowed relief of ₹ 1,00,000/-. In the hands of Niva Dalmia, wife of Shri Abhishek Dalmia, no addition was made. Even if I go by the estimate of CIT(A) that receipt of diamond jewellery of ₹ 1,00,000/- on account of marriage by way of gift is reasonable, similar amount of diamond jewellery of ₹ 1,00,000/- should be considered as reasonable in the hands of the wife of the assessee Niva Dalmia and therefore, even by his estimate also, no addition is justified. Hence, the addition partly upheld by CIT(A) is deleted. 18. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. 19. In the combined result, all the four appeals are allowed. (Order was pronounced in the open court on the date men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
