Appeal partly allowed, unexplained jewellery deletion, 50% silver addition upheld.

The appeal was partly allowed, with the addition on unexplained jewellery being deleted due to correct valuation and separate consideration of explained purchases. The 50% addition on silver items was upheld based on the family's status.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Addition of unexplained jewellery during search and seizure action.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the order of the ld. CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 9,76,895 on account of unexplained jewellery found during the search, with the ld. CIT(A) upholding Rs. 4,57,404 of the same. The jewellery included gold and silver items valued at Rs. 32,71,895. The assessee claimed benefit under CBDT Instruction No. 1916 for 850 gms. of jewellery, but the AO denied the benefit for 343.328 gms. purchased and recorded in the books. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed this denial but allowed the cost of jewellery as per purchase bills, upholding Rs. 4,57,404. Additionally, 50% of the value of unexplained silver items was sustained by the ld. CIT(A) based on the family's status. The assessee argued that the purchases made and recorded should be considered separately from the CBDT Instruction. The AO valued the jewellery at Rs. 2700 per gram, while the ld. CIT(A) accepted the cost as per purchase bills. The Tribunal held that the explained jewellery should not be part of the reasonable possession under CBDT Instruction, thus deleting the addition. The 50% addition for silver items was upheld as reasonable.

In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed, with the addition on unexplained jewellery being deleted due to correct valuation and separate consideration of explained purchases. The 50% addition on silver items was upheld based on the family's status.

---