TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (12) TMI 919
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was a minor till assessment year 1988-89. The return for assessment year 1988-89 was filed on 25-7-1990 after the assessee had attained the age of majority. A declaration under the Amnesty Scheme had been filed under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 on 31-3-1987 when the assessee was a minor. The silver utensils weighing 145.010 kgs. had been disclosed in the Wealth-tax return. The description of the silver utensils as per the valuation report is as under :- Total Weight Itemwise Weight Description I. 5.010 kgs. 1.165 kgs. Five glasses .418 kgs. One Atra Thal .746 kgs. One bed room set of 3 pcs. .....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....used by the assessee. Thus the assessee cannot be said to have used the silver utensils intimately and commonly. (2) That the assessee was a minor till assessment year 1988-89. (3) That the assessee had disclosed total silver utensils weighing 145.010 kgs. in assessment year 1987-88 as per the return filed on 31-3-1987 under the Amnesty Scheme. Substantial quantity of silver utensils weighing 97.549 kgs. was sold on 11-9-1987 i.e. just after few months of the disclosure. It has been pointed out by the Assessing Officer that normally personal effects would be sold only in crisis. Since the assessee was a minor in the year of sale, she was wholly dependent on the parents and it cannot be said that she was in crisis. The Assessing Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... v. Sitadevi N. Poddar [1984] 148 ITR 506 2 and in the case of Jayantilal A. Shah v. K.N. Anantharam Aiyar, CIT [1985] 156 ITR 4483 have been held to be distinguishable on facts. 5. The Assessing Officer accordingly assessed the sum of Rs. 2,01,186 as capital gains on sale of 97.549 kgs. of silver utensils. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) but without any success. 6. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee had filed Wealth-tax returns under the Amnesty Scheme and disclosed the silver utensils. The silver utensils were personal effects of the assessee. The assessee has sold part of the silver utensils during the year under appeal and since the sale of personal effects does not attract capital gains the Asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Tribunal in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. ITO [1987] 28 TTJ (Delhi) 188 in support of the contention that the quantum of weight of the utensils sold cannot lead to inference adverse to the assessee. It was pointed out that the facts of this case are somewhat similar to the facts of assessee's case. Referring to the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of N. Ramanathan Chettiar (supra) relied upon by the Department, it was contended that the said decision is not applicable in view of the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sitadevi N. Poddar (supra) and in the case of Jayantilal A. Shah (supra). Relying upon the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. CTO [1988] ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilver utensils as on 31-3-1987 cannot be questioned in view of the Amnesty Scheme. However, when these assets disclosed under the Wealth-tax Act are sold, the Assessing Officer is free and in fact duty-bound to enquire and examine the subsequent utilisation of the assets. In this case the assessee has claimed that the silver utensils which were disclosed under the Amnesty Scheme and sold soon after the disclosure, were in fact the personal effects in respect of which capital gain was not chargeable. This claim of the assessee has not been accepted by the Assessing Officer for the reasons enumerated in Para No. 4 above and the CIT(A) has also confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer. 9. The facts stated by the revenue authorities have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a utensils and ornaments. When we look at this list in the background of the appellant being a minor even in the year under appeal, it cannot be said that these silver utensils were personal effects of the assessee. It is also evident from the fact that soon after the disclosure made on behalf of the minor, a major portion of the silver utensils have been sold. As rightly pointed out by the Assessing Officer, the sale of silver utensils was not on account of desperate circumstances but for better utilisation of capital (the money has been advanced to a party after realising the sale proceeds). It is claimed by the assessee that the silver utensils of substantial number are required on certain occasions for use of the family. One would be te....