9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 893X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n respect of jewellery found in course of search of ₹ 14,66,884/- at the residence of the assessee, of ₹ 1,97,700/- in the bed room of the assessee and ₹ 6,79,031/- found from locker No.1870, the AO had accepted the explanation of the assessee to the extent of ₹ 5,14,636/- being the jewellery purchased by the assessee by way of cheque and the AO also accepted that the jewellery to the extent of 500 grams of gold for ₹ 4,00,000/- as Streedhan and in this manner, he accepted the explanation to the extent of ₹ 9,14,636/- and made addition of ₹ 14,28,979/-. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) who had confirmed the addition of ₹ 5,52,248/- and delete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellant claimed that the balance ornaments represent Streedhan and credit should be given for the same as per Circular No.1916. The A. O. has not accepted the explanation of the ornaments belonging to Virbalaben Shah on the ground that all the items as per valuation report of Virbalaben Shah did not match with the items as per Panchnama and that she did not file any wealth tax return. However, he has given credit in the case of the appellant for ornaments purchased as also for the ornaments upto 500 grams of gold as Streedhan. He has not given credit for the other family members as per circular, as the items as per description were that of lady members. On the other hand the appellant has explained that the valuation report of Virba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... longing to Lt. Virbalaben Shah - unexplained 1,97,700 Jewellery found from Locker in 1870 relating to Virbalaben 6,79,031 8,76,731 Total unexplained jewellery (a) + (b) 14,28,979 On consideration above position the ornaments pertaining to Virbalaben cannot be considered as unexplained and as such the addition of ₹ 8,76,731/- made on account of such ornaments is not justified and is deleted. For the balance addition, as the A. O. has already considered credit for ornaments purchased by the appellant and credit for ornaments as per Circular, no further relief is possible. As such the addition is reduced to ₹ 5,52,248/-. The appellant has requested for credit for application out of disclosure made in group case towards such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und from bedroom of the assessee and ₹ 6,79,031/- being jewellery found from locker No.1870 cannot be sustained because the same stands explained by such Will and valuation report of Virbalaben, mother-in-law of the assessee. Regarding second objection of the AO that items are not tallying, we find force in the submissions of the learned AR of the assessee raised before the AO, learned CIT(A) and before us also that over the period of time, items of gold jewellery keep on changing because of remaking and, therefore, gross weight of gold jewellery found in course of search should be taken as explained to the extent of gross weight of gold jewellery as per valuation report already accepted as per wealth tax return filed by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
