TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT ] held that where assessee s valuation figures are supported by valuation report of Registered Valuer and WTO has not made a reference to valuation cell, then the assessee s figures are required to be accepted. Insofar as the items of jewellery covered by the FIR, the assessee is bound by the valuation secured by the Hon ble High Court and the assessee cannot seek to reopen the same. Insofar as the items of jewellery not covered by FIR, however, the Revenue is expected to take a consistent stand in respect of all the items thereof and in view of the settled position of law, the assessing officer is directed to consider the revised valuation secured by police or by the assessee, as the case may be, and submitted by the assessee. Appeal of the assessee is, accordingly, allowed in part. - W.T.A.Nos.02 & 03/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 31-10-2019 - Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon ble Vice President And Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate, Ms Deepashree Rao, CA, Shri Vibhu Gupta, CA For the Respondent : Dr. V.K. Chadha, Sr. DR ORDER PER K. N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0-11, but made the claim by way of revised claim during assessment proceedings; whereas for the Assessment Year 2011-12, the revised claim was made by filing the revised return. 4. The claim of the assessee is apparently in respect of the jewellery of two descriptions, namely, the jewellery studded with fake/inferior quality stones which were sold to the assessee claiming to be of highquality Emeralds and Ruby in respect of which the assessee lodged an FIR with police and the jewellery which were sold at an inflated cost in respect of which no FIR could be lodged by the assessee. 5. Learned Assessing Officer, however, refused to consider the reduced value of the jewellery for the purpose of determining the net wealth of the assessee and passed the assessment orders. When the assessee preferred appeal, Ld. CIT(A) by way of impugned order dated 27/3/2018 held that the value in respect of the items of jewellery covered by the FIRs had not in the pending proceedings before the criminal courts and, therefore, the value pleaded by the assessee cannot be considered as market value; whereas the items of jewellery not covered by the FIRs, Ld. CIT(A) took into c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iminal cases, and Hon ble Delhi High Court by order dated 01/08/2018 directed him to refund the value of the jewellery sold by him to the tune of ₹ 15,89,44,677/-to the assessee upon the return of the jewellery by the assessee, but the matter is still pending before the Hon ble High Court inasmuch as the jeweller failed repeatedly to comply with the orders of the Hon ble High Court. 9. According to the Ld. AR all these facts cumulatively lend credence to the submissions of the assessee that the market value of the jewellery was lower than the value originally declared in the wealth tax return and, therefore, the authorities below to have considered the value of the jewellery as per the valuation report dated 29/01/2013. He referred to the provisions of section 16A of the Act in support of his argument that it is mandatory for the wealth tax officer to make a reference to the valuation officer in case there is a conflict of opinion with regard to the value of a to the value of a particular set and mere allegation that the assessee failed to produce valuation report in support of jewellery declared earlier, cannot lead to an adverse inference against the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... light of these provisions, now we shall proceed to deal with the issues involved in this matter. 14. Insofar as the items of property covered by the FIR are concerned, the total value of such property is about 15.89 crores as paid by the assessee. It could be seen from the order dated 01/08/2018 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 177/2018 and batch passed by the Hon ble Delhi High Court that Mr Govind Narain Johari expressed his readiness and willingness to refund the money of the assessee against the return of jewellery mentioned in the FIRs.Recording such a fact, the Hon ble High Court directed the return of property and the jeweller to pay the entire amount of 15.89 crores to the assessee. By paying ₹ 15.89 crores the assessee acquired certain jewellery and on return of the same she is getting back the same amount. There is no depreciation in the value of the property received by the assessee on the return. The order of the Hon ble High Court clearly ensures the assessee to get whatever the value she has paid for the jewellery and, therefore, is not open for the assessee now to say that the value of the jewellery covered by the FIR is something less than wha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration of the directions issued by the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of the value of such items of jewellery as are not covered by the FIR, it occurs to our mind that there is inherent inconsistency in the approach of the Ld. CIT(A), because while referring to schedule III of the Act in the light of Section 7 read with Rule 18 thereof, Ld. CIT(A) made an observation that the jewellery shall be valued on the estimation of the price which it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date. If it would be so, we do not find any logic in the Ld. CIT(A) directing the ld. Assessing Officer to take the higher value as per the valuation report by ignoring the items the revised the value of which is less than the returned value. Further in the case of CWT vs. Raghunath Singh Thakur (2008) 304 ITR 268 (HP), the Hon ble High Court held that where assessee s valuation figures are supported by valuation report of Registered Valuer and WTO has not made a reference to valuation cell, then the assessee s figures are required to be accepted. 20. In the circumstances, for the reasons recorded in the preceding paragraphs, we are of the considered opinion that, insofar as the items ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
