1983 (10) TMI 125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... years. The business was carried on by a sole concern up to 31st March, 1975 and it was thereafter converted into a partnership in which he is a partner. He is assessed to income-tax since 1964-65. There were some anonymous petitions against him. Therefore, he was contacted by the Inspector of Income tax on 3rd March, 1979. The Inspector questioned him about his investment etc. In a statement recorded by the Inspector from the assessee in respect of his business activities, investment etc. the assessee mentioned that the jewellery to the extent of 1-1/2 Kg. were available in his house and that the same was purchased by him ten to fifteen years ago and that they were mostly ancestral. Then there was a search on 23rd March, 1979. The search p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....plained investment. The CIT (A) held that what all was seen worn by the wife, son and daughter-in-law be treated as that of theirs and the remainder be treated as the unexplained investment of the assessee. So. 1559 grams were excluded. The assessee appeals for further relief. 3. The first submission of the assessee is that he is neither the person in possession nor the owner of these ornaments and jewellery. His submission is that the house is not in his exclusive possession and that others like wife and children have also access to it and that, therefore, seizure from the house is not evidence of his possession, that his wife, son daughters and daughter-in-law have their own independent means and sources of acquisition and that even the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....die in diem till the article is sold, lost or discarded and that, therefore, throughout or every day in the accounting year and even earlier to it he is the owner. What he says is that the financial year in which the date of discovery by the ITO falls cannot be taken as the financial year in which the assessee is found to be the owner and that the financial year in which the assessee is found to be the owner is and should be the financial year in which the assessee first became the owner either by purchase or investment or the like. The expression "where in any financial year the assessee is found to be the owner" according to the assessee is not synonymous with the date of discovery or physical finding or sight by naked eyes but a finding ....