TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old or silver or alloy as on the valuation date relevant to the subsequent year shall be substituted for the value of such gold or silver or alloy on the valuation date relevant to the first Assessment Year. This, in effect, would mean that in the valuation of jewellery, the value of the metal, be it gold, silver or alloy, will have to be substituted every year whereas for the other items in the jewellery, the value as per the valuation report can be continued to be taken for a period of four years at the same valuation.is binding on the revenue authorities. In view of our findings, we delete the addition made to the declared value of the jewellery while framing the assessment. by the Assessing Officer. - Decided in favour of assessee - WTA No. 4/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 29-2-2016 - Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member And Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri M.L. Dujari CA For the Respondent : Shri O. P. Meena, Sr. DR ORDER Per Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order dated 6.5.2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Wealth Tax (A)-29 New Delhi and pertains to Assessment Yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal before us and has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. That the order of the learned Assessing Officer is bad in law and is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of ₹ 15,96,147/- to the declared value of the jewellery while framing the assessment. 2.2 That the ld. Assessing Officer was bound by the CBDT Circular No. 646 dated 15th March, 1993 and was accordingly required to accept the valuation of the jewellery declared by the assessee for the valuation date in accordance with the said circular. 3. That the addition of ₹ 15,96,147/- made by the Assessing Officer to the declared wealth of the assessee deserves to be deleted. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had made suitable appreciation adjustments for the value of metal used in jewellery but no appreciation was made with regard to the value of stones and the difference in valuation is on account of value of stones only. He submitted that the Assessing Officer himself has given a finding to the effect in paras 4.3 and 4.4 of his order. He also submitted that since the assessee had not violated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the report of the registered valuer for the initial assessment year along with a chart showing adjustments made as above are enclosed along with the return of the net wealth furnished by the assessee. Circular: No. 646 dated 15.3.1993 8. It is seen from the Circular that Para 3(a) in the Circular lays down that where the jewellery includes gold or silver or any alloy containing god or silver, the value of such gold or silver or alloy as on the valuation date relevant to the subsequent year shall be substituted for the value of such gold or silver or alloy on the valuation date relevant to the first Assessment Year. This, in effect, would mean that in the valuation of jewellery, the value of the metal, be it gold, silver or alloy, will have to be substituted every year whereas for the other items in the jewellery, the value as per the valuation report can be continued to be taken for a period of four years at the same valuation. 9. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the stand and conduct of the assessee is correct in so far as the interpretation of the Circular is concerned. It is seen from the records and has also been found by the Assessing Officer as correct tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aimed or stated that the circular was contrary to the statute. 11. Thus, what has been laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Nagesh Knitwears is that the revenue can challenge the validity of a circular but where the revenue has not filed an appeal challenging the Circular, the Circular will be binding on the Revenue. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Addl. CIT vs Mrs. Avtar Mohan Singh 136 ITR 645 (Del) has observed that though the Circulars of the Central Board are not binding on the court, yet general circulars are binding on the income tax authorities. Through them, the Board cannot impose a burden on the tax payer greater than what the statute provides, but it can relax the rigor of the law. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court has taken the view in CWT vs . Gammon India P. Ltd. [1981] 130 ITR 471 (Bom) that if a circular is relied upon for the first time in the High Court in the course of the hearing of a reference under the Income Tax Act, it must be given effect to by the court because the Circulars issued by the CBDT are binding on the Income Tax Officer. 12. In Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT 2012(3) SCC 784, the Hon'ble Supreme Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs providing administrative relief to the assessee, even if they are issued subsequent to the decision by an authority under the Act, have to be taken notice of and given effect to if found applicable in the given facts. Circular, even if produced in the High Court for the first time during the course of hearing has to be taken note of and the assessee will be entitled to the benefit of the circular, if found entitled, irrespective of the fact that it was not produced before the authorities below or was issued by the CBDT subsequent to the decision given by the Tribunal. Also, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Madhu Silica (P) Ltd. v. CIT 227 ITR 350 (Guj) has noted that circular being in the nature of laying down general guide lines for proper administration of the Act for those who are employed in the execution of the Act are bound to observe such instructions particularly those which are beneficial to the assessee. 15. So long as circular issued under section 119 is in force it would be binding on the departmental authorities to ensure a uniform and proper administration and application of the Income Tax Act (UCO Bank vs. CIT (1999) 11 SITC 415 (SC). The Hon'ble Supre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
