TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 1057
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee filed return of income for A.Y 2010-11 on 17.10.2011 declaring total income of Rs. 6,86,520/-. The case of Assessee was selected for scrutiny and thereafter, assessment was framed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153A vide order dated 22.03.2013 and total income was determined at Rs. 36,52,528/-. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 29.04.2015 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)-12/NSK CIT(A)-I/281/2013-14) granted partial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds: "In view of the facts of the case, provisions of law, evidence on record and the submissions made- 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in retaining the addition made on the ground of unexplained investment in property, u/s 69, at Rs. 1,36,657/-, without properly appreciating the facts of the case. Therefore, it is prayed to cancel the addition retained at Rs. 1,36,657/-. 2. The learned C!T(A) erred in retaining the addition made for possession of silver articles, weighing 10.595 kgs, valued at Rs. 2,57,460/-, u/s. 69A, without properly appreciating the explanation offered for possession of such silv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0,150 was paid by cash. On the other hand, learned AO has stated that the source of income for the payments of Rs. 2,00,500 has not been explained by the assessee. However, the learned AO has not given break-up of Rs. 2,00,500. 2.1.4 The perusal of the agreement shows that the Appellant has made cheque payments to the number of land owners totaling Rs. 2,63,843. Source of the cash payments is stated to be out of the funds received from Shri Ashok Katariya. Thus considering the explanation and the evidence, according to me, the cheque payments are acceptable. The Appellant has stated that two cheques totaling of Rs. 16,507 were not encashed. According to me, if these cheques have not been encashed for some reasons, then the Appellant would have paid the land owners cash. This is because, it is not possible that the owners were not fully paid when the land is transferred to the Appellant. 2.1.5 Further, as far as the amount of cash payment of Rs. 1,20,150 is concerned, the Appellant is stated to have paid this amounts on different dates according to his cash book. Source of these payments is stated to be out of the Appellant's savings. In this connection, I find that the Ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that though Assessee has not filed return of income from A.Y 2007-08 onwards, yet his submission of maintaining books of accounts & further the preparation of cash book after the search has little credibility and is against human probabilities. He has also noted that in the absence of any contemporaneous evidences of cash payments, amount has been rightly considered to be out of his explained source of income by the Assessing Officer. Before us, the Ld. AR has not brought any material on record to controvert the findings of CIT(A) and therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A). Thus, ground No. 1 raised by Assessee is dismissed. 8. The ground No. 2 is with respect to addition of Rs. 2,57,460/-. 9. During course of search action, gold jewellery weighing 614 gms valued at Rs. 10,33,797/- was found in the locker. At the residence of Assessee, gold jewellery weighing 661.050gms valued at Rs. 13,04,250/- and silver utensils of 10.595 kg valued at Rs. 2,57,460/- was found. The Assessee was asked to explain the source of the investments in the gold jewellery and silver utensils found in the locker and his residence. The submission of Assessee was that part of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....500 231.50 gr 5 Mr. Narendra R Shakadwipi 76.000 76.00 gr 6 White silver Utensil & Articles Mrs. Vimal Narendra Shakadwipi 10.595 kg --- 10.595 kg 2.2.5. I agree with the Appellant that the total jewellery is within the permissible weight limits of the each family members according to the CBDT Instruction. I find that the ownership of jewellery found at the residence was claimed by the respective family members according to the inventory of jewellery prepared at the time of search. Therefore, I do not agree with the learned AO's view that the jewellery is unexplained because the confirmations are prepared after the search when it falls within the permissible limits according to the CBDT Instructions. I also do not accept the learned AO's objection that in absence of Wealth-tax returns, the jewellery would be treated as unexplained. This is because if the person's wealth does not exceed minimum amount chargeable to wealth tax, the person will not file his Wealth-tax return. Therefore, I do not draw any conclusion against the assessee in absence of their Wealth-tax returns. Accordingly, I treat that gold weighing 1,275.0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee and not from the bedroom of the Assessee's mother. Before us, it is Ld.A.R.'s contention that at the time of search the inventory of silver was made in the name of wife of Assessee, while making the assessment in the hands of Assessee's wife, no addition has been made. The aforesaid contention of Ld. AR has not been controverted by Revenue. In such a situation, we are of the view that no addition of silver of Rs. 2,57,460/- in the hands of Assessee is called for. Thus Ground No. 2 raised by Assessee is allowed. 14. The ground No. 3 is with respect to addition of Rs. 1,70,000/- on account of unexplained investment in KVPs. 15. During the course of search action, Kisan Vikas Patra (KVPs) amounting to Rs. 8,51,500/-were found. The assessee was asked to furnish details of the source of investment to which Assessee inter alia submitted that investment of Rs. 1,70,000/- was made during the year out of cash in his hand. The Assessing Officer noted that Assessee had submitted a statement of cash in hand from 1.5.2005 with the opening balance of Rs. 1,20,130/-. He noted that assessee had not submitted any documentary evidence to prove the source of the opening balance of cash of....