TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 797X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the jeweler as it was registered with the Sales Tax Department and no verification with the sales tax department was carried out. But the lower authorities had not brought anything on record that the jeweler was not in existence at the relevant time when the jewellery was sold. Similarly, in our view considered view that the additions cannot be sustained in the hands of the assessee just the parties failed to appear before the AO. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No.1847/Kol/2014 - - - Dated:- 10-3-2017 - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For The Appellant : Shri Sital Chandra Das, JCIT-DR For The Respondent : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate ORDER PER Wasee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on 13.12.1998 from a Registered Valuer who has valued the same at ₹ 9,63,356/-. In the year 2008 she again revalued the same from the Registered Valuer who valued at ₹ 14,35,570/-. Subsequently she sold the entire jewellery to M/s. Bhavin Jewellers located in Ahmedabad having GST No.24070701303 dated 01.07.2002 GST TIN No.24570701303 dated 23.03.1992 for ₹ 17,10,535/-. Besides the above, the assessee submitted that the AO has taken the total deposits of ₹ 36,55,675/- as income without considering the withdrawals made in cash from such bank account. The cash withdrawals from the bank are of ₹ 23,75,000/-. There was an opening balance of cash in the hands of the assessee as on 1st April, 2008 for ₹ 7,46 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A/cs which is clearly available from the date wise cash flow statement with supporting evidences. He has submitted that there was cash withdrawal from Bank Accounts during the year under consideration, opening cash balance which was withdrawn on 12.3.2008 from SB A/c No. 40256 of Axis Bank, sale of jewellery and loan/advance taken from near relatives and friends. He has submitted that cash deposits in bank A/cs are fully and clearly explained as most of such deposits are out of withdrawals from Banks and sale of Jewellery. I have thoroughly checked and verified that the cash deposits in the Bank A/cs as added by the AO were out of the withdrawals from Banks, Advances/Loans from relatives/friends and sale of jewellery the source of which has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2008-09 and as such the sale of jewellery cannot be denied. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I hold that ₹ 36,55,675/- added as unexplained cash deposits in Bank A/cs is not justified as can be seen from the findings in the foregoing paras. The same is directed to be deleted. Being aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before us. 5. The ld. AR before us reiterated the submissions as made before the ld. CIT(A) and he relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A). On the other hand, the ld. DR relied on the order of AO. 6. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates to the disallow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has sold her jewelleries was not traceable. Similarly, the parties who have given loan to the assessee failed to appear before the AO. But in our view sufficient details were furnished by the assessee with regard to the jeweler as it was registered with the Sales Tax Department and no verification with the sales tax department was carried out. But the lower authorities had not brought anything on record that the jeweler was not in existence at the relevant time when the jewellery was sold. Similarly, in our view considered view that the additions cannot be sustained in the hands of the assessee just the parties failed to appear before the AO. Thus in view of above we do not find any infirmity in the order of learned CITA. Hence this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
