TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 1035
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umulation of funds withdrawn from the bank and evidence for such withdrawals were also placed before the authorities below besides explaining the circumstances. Thus, the addition should be deleted. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,07,682 made on accounts of unexplained investments in gold ornaments by ignoring the submission and circumstances. Thus, the addition should be deleted. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 9,48,867 made on account of diamond jewellery though the source of acquisition of the same were explained and has been accepted for the major items by him in the appellate order. Thus, the addition should be deleted. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend the groups of appeal on or before the hearing of this appeal. Additional ground of appeal taken on October 26, 2010 5. The Revenue erred in law in basing assessment order under section 143(3) for the assessment year 2006-07 on the outcome of searches conducted under section 132 when warrant was in the name of Vijay L. Bhawe, Pratibha V. B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cash books are not maintained, even by the individual assessee, then cash cannot be said to be explained under the law and that bowing down to the pressure of the search team, cash was offered as unaccounted income. But the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was not satisfied with the submissions of the assessee and, therefore, he confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer by relying upon the statement of the asses see made at the time of search and also on the ground that though the assessee had submitted the details of withdrawals but the assessee had failed to furnish details of expenses incurred out of these withdrawals. 4.3. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. 4.4. During the course of hearing before us, the learned counsel made his arguments at length and reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities. Our attention was also drawn upon the statements recorded at the time of search and also upon the details of cash withdrawals and household expenses of the assessee and his family members for the assessment years 2000-01 to 2006-07, (i.e., up to date of search). It was also submitted that the statement was made ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....times to come, particularly when the statement was given by him under some confusion, pressure and misunderstanding of facts and legal position. 4.8. The correct legal position in this regard was clarified by the honourable Supreme Court way back in its landmark judgment in Pullan gode Rubber Produce Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1973] 91 ITR 18 (SC) wherein it was held that an admission is an extremely important piece of evidence but it cannot be said that it is conclusive, and therefore, it was open to the person who made the admission to show that it was incorrect. The judgment has been followed subsequently by many courts in our country which are not discussed here for the sake of brevity. Thus, the situation that emerges before us for our consideration is that whether the impugned addition could have been made dehors the aforesaid statement of the assessee wherein the assessee had offered the impugned amount of cash for taxation as its income. It is noted that the assessee is living in a joint family comprising various family members as have been discussed above. Though, the entire house was covered in the search and all the family members were also covered in the search but r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of search indicating that entire withdrawals were exhausted in meeting household, marriage and other expenses. Thus, we cannot ignore the avail ability of cash on account of huge amount of withdrawals from the bank just on the basis of doubts and surmise, especially when no contrary material has been brought on record. In our view, the assessee has duly explained the availability of cash of Rs. 6,36,900 found at the time of search out of the cash available on account of withdrawals made by the assessee and his family members in the current year as well as during the last seven years. We find that addition made by the Assessing Officer is not sustain able and, therefore, the same is directed to be deleted. 5. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 : These grounds deal with the grievances of the assessee with regard to the addition of Rs. 14,07,682 made on account of unexplained investment in gold ornaments and addition of Rs. 9,48,867 made on account of diamond jewellery. 5.1. The brief background and the facts as culled out from the orders of the lower authorities are that during the course of search, gold jewellery of Rs. 47,07,818, diamond jewellery of Rs. 35,35,166 and silver articles of Rs. 70....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ewellery weighing 1804.74 grams (23.25 grams + 1781.49 grams) was treated as unexplained jewellery and was added to the total income of the assessee which resulted in addition of Rs. 14,07,682. 5.2. Similarly, addition of Rs. 21,32,958 was made on account of unaccounted diamond jewellery. The addition was made for the amount of difference between the value shown as per the wealth-tax returns and the value adopted by the Departmental Valuer arising on account of mismatch in the items as shown in the wealth-tax returns and as described by the valuer in its valuation report. The assessee made detailed submissions before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). But the addition on account of unaccounted gold jewellery was confirmed and part relief was given of Rs. 11,84,091 on account of diamond jewellery. Before us, the learned counsel made detailed submissions. His primary objection was that in this case jewellery has been recovered from individual and personal possession of various family members and has been, accordingly, recorded in the panchnama and, accordingly, valued by the Departmental Valuer separately at the time of search. Our attention was drawn on the valuation....