TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 982
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d herewith in the form of receipt evidencing the fact that the appeals were filed on 17.04.2018 in the office of the CIT(DR) ITAT. 3. However, when no notice was received by the assessee from the registry and the above said mistake was noticed by the undersigned, we immediately prepared another set and filed the requisite appeals on 04.02.2019 in the office of ITAT, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh. 4. Then, we moved an application to the CIT(DR), ITAT, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh vide application, dated 15.02.2019 and, thereafter, the said original appeals as filed before the CIT (DR) were returned back to us as per necessary evidence in this regard being enclosed herewith. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, it is very clear that the appeals were prepared in time and even the prescribed fees were also deposited in time, but the said appeals were filed on 17.04.2018 inadvertantly in the Office of CIT (DR), ITAT, Chandigarh, due to mistake on the part of the staff of the Assessee's counsel and which has now been confirmed by the office of the CIT (DR) and, as such, the delay of 258 is only on account of the bonafide mistake in filing the appeals in the o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd. We therefore are of the view that there was a reasonable cause for filing the appeal belated and the assessee has a plausible explanation. We therefore by considering the totality of the facts as discussed hereinabove, condone the delay and the appeal is admitted. 6. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. 1a) That the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Gurgaon has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer on account of alleged unexplained Jewellery amounting to Rs. 59,59,890/- U/S 69A of the Act as per Ground No.2, Para 5 of her order. b) That the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Gurgaon has failed to appreciate the explanation given by the assessee during the course of post search enquiries that the Jewellery was, in fact, acquired after the search and redemption of Gold Bond, which was distributed by his father among the various family members and the same explanation was given during the course of assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings, but the same has been rejected on flimsy grounds. c) That the Ld. CIT(A)-2, has ignored that the same Jewellery had been declared in the wealth tax returns and merely that such returns of wealth were filed after the search, but neverthe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h gross weight 669.650 gms valued at Rs. 15,92,977/- was found from the residential premises of the assessee and in the locker belonging to the assessee Jewellery including gold bars with gross weight of 3349.800 gms valued at Rs. 94,90,152/- was found. He asked the assessee to explain the source of Jewellery. In response the assessee submitted that the source of gold bars found in the locker was the redemption of Gold Bond Scheme. The A.O. observed that the serial numbers of the gold bars mentioned in the redemption certificate were different from one mentioned in the Gold Bond physically found from the locker and as the assessee could not offer any plausible explanation, the Jewellery from the locker valuing Rs. 94,90,152/- was seized. The A.O. asked the assessee to give source and year of purchase of Jewellery found during the course of search. In response the assessee submitted as under: "Regarding your Honour's query relating to the source of gold/gold Jewellery found from the Locker No. AA00006 with Punjab National Bank, Barnala valuing Rs. 94,90,152/- weighing 3349.800 grams, in reply it is respectfully submitted that the assessee alongwith his family members namely Smt. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch. Wealth Tax Returns have been filed only by Rakesh Bansal (HUF) and that to upto the A.Y.2002-03. The assessee and his family members filed their wealth tax returns after the search was conducted upon unearthing Jewellery / gold with gross weight of 4019.45 gms. The details of filing of Wealth Tax Return as per returns are as under:- Sr. No. Name of the person A.Y. Gold declared in Wealth Tax Return Date of filing wealth tax return 1. Shri Bansal Rakesh 2008-09 to 2011-12 1444 gms 11.12.2013 2012-13 & 2013-14 26.11.2013 2014-15 29.12.2014 2. Smt. Bansal Kavita 2008-09 & 2009-10 1978 gms 11.12.2013 2010-11 & 2011-12 1446 gms 11.12.2013 2012-13 & 2013-14 1446 gms 26.11.2013 2014-15 1446 gms 30.12.2014 3. Shri Mohit Bansal 2008-09 & 2009-10 886 gms 26.11.2013 2010-11 to 2013-14 (except 2009-10 & 2011-12) 1418 gms. 26.11.2013 2014-15 1418 gms 30.12.2014 4. Rakesh Bansal HUF 2008-09 to 2011-12 900 gms 10.12.2013 2012-13 & 2013-14 26.11.2013 2014-15 30.12.2014 The family members of the assessee filed the wealth tax returns for the first time after the search operation i.e. after detection of possession of unrecorded gold / Jewellery. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of CIT vs. Naresh Kumar Kohli dated 17.11.2014, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has upheld the order of Hon'ble ITAT, Chandigarh in which 400 gms of Jewellery has been considered as Istridhan received at the time of marriage from parents and also held that appellant can get benefit of Rs. 4 lacs as savings from his past income and the benefit of such savings has been given for acquisition of the Jewellery. The referred case pertains to A.Y 1987 to 1997, taking the gold rate of Rs. 400 to Rs. 500 per gm, the savings of Rs. 4 lac at that time would mean Jewellery weighing approximately 800 gms. Hence, effectively the Hon'ble Court has accepted 400 gms of Jewellery as Istridhan for wife and 800 gms of Jewellery as to be purchased from assume savings of past of husband. Therefore, credit for 1200 gms is given to Smt. Kavita Bansal w/o the assessee as her stridhan and to the assessee. As regards, the balance gold weighing 1919.45 gms, which is valued at Rs. 59,59,890/- (@ 3105 per gram) the assessee has not been able to provide any proof of purchase of the said gold and the explanation offered by him is not found to be satisfactory. Therefore, the same is treated as unexpla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0015-16 and computation of income of Sh. Mohit Bansal is also enclosed, where the factum of sale of Jewellery owned by him is depicted. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the Jewellery found from the appellant during the course of search is in any way unexplained or acquired during the year under appeal and liable to be assessed as deemed income u/s 69A of the Act. The addition made on this account deserves to be deleted. Vide the third ground of appeal, the appellant is agitating against the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in treating the cash found from the residence of the appellant to the extent of Rs. 5,29,320/- as unaccounted and added to the income of the appellant as deeded income u/s 69A. The brief facts of the case are that the cash amounting to Rs. 24,78,045/- was- found from the residence of the appellant out of which Rs. 24,00,000/- was seized by alleging that the appellant could not explain the source of cash. However, the appellant had duly stated in his statement that this cash is out of the cash balance of his Proprietary Concern M/s Barnala Filling Station, company namely M/s Sarvesh Spinners Pvt. Ltd. in which he is Managing Director and als....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Assessing Officer, it appears that the figure of gross taxable income has been taken into consideration as against net taxable income after allowance of deduction under Chapter VIA. It is further submitted that as per the query letter dated 26.06.2015 (copy of which is enclosed), the appellant was asked to provide necessary evidence with respect to claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Act. The appellant had duty replied and submitted evidence vide letter dated 18.09.2015, copy of which is enclosed along with necessary evidence. Regarding deduction u/s 80TTA, the same is on account interest from saving account, which was declared by the appellant in his return of income. The deduction may kindly be ordered to be allowed in view of the above facts. Keeping in view the submissions made above, the appeal may kindly be adjudicated accordingly. 11. Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee sustained the addition by observing in para 5 of the impugned order as under: I have gone through the fact of the case, Assessing Officer contentions and submissions of the appellant. From the assessment order, it is apparent that the Assessing Officer has considered e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch and that the serial numbers as per the maturity certificate of Gold Bond Scheme were not matching with the actual gold bars found during the course of search. It was explained that the assessee had duly stated during his statement recorded at the time of operating the Locker that they were in the process of filing the Wealth Tax Returns, a reference was made to page no. 2 of the assessment order. As regards to the mismatch of the serial numbers of gold bars, it was stated that the investments in gold bond/scheme were also made by the brother and father of the assessee, so at the time of maturity the gold bars must have been exchanged. 13.1 It was submitted that the assessee in his reply to the A.O. explained the Jewellery as per following details: SI. Name of the Family Member Source of Gold/Jewellery Weight in Gms Relevant Pg-Nos 1. Kavita Bansal Gold Bonds 1998 532 Pg-39-41 of PB SBI Gold Bond Deposit Scheme 996 Pg-35-36 of PB Gold as per Wealth Tax Return AY 1992-1993 450 Pg-37-38 of PB Copy Of Wealth Tax Assessment Order of Smt. Kavita Bansal, wife of the appellant for A/Y 2008-09 along with copy of computation and Wealth Tax Return ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al HUF and 1200 gms gold in the hands of Shri Kavita Bansal and the remaining gold / Jewellery to the tune of 1919.45 gms had not been accepted for the reason that the wealth tax returns had been filed late and secondly the serial number of gold bars did not match with the gold bonds, but nowhere it was stated that the gold available as per the Gold Bonds was not genuine. It was contended that all the relevant documents in the form of Gold Bonds and the documents pertaining to the maturity of Gold Bonds were duly filed with the Department and even otherwise the fact remained that the quantity as found during the course of search was less than the quantity as proved by the assessee in the form of Gold Bonds and Wealth Tax Returns, therefore the Department could not have rejected the quantity available with the assessee only by holding that the serial number of the gold bars did not match and even if the gold bars had been exchanged with someone the weight remained the same and it could not have been ignored. It was further contended that the Department had duly accepted the Wealth Tax Returns filed by the assessee and his family members, therefore, no adverse inference could have be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sent case, it is an admitted fact that during the course of search, Jewellery weighing 669.650 gms was found from the residential premises of the assessee and Jewellery weighing 3349.80 gms was found from the locker belonging to the assessee, thus the total Jewellery found was 4019.45 gms, while the A.O. had given benefit of 2100 gms out of the aforesaid Jewellery. The benefit given was for 900 gms shown by the HUF of the assessee in the Wealth Tax Returns and 1200 gms belonging to Smt Kavita Bansal wife of the assessee on account of Jewellery purchased in past from savings and as Istridhan. The A.O. made the addition for the remaining Jewellery i.e; 1919.45 gms for the reason that Wealth Tax Returns filed by the assessee were belated and that the gold bars found did not match with the number mentioned in the Gold Bonds. In the present case it is noticed that the A.O. accepted the Jewellery shown by the HUF of the assessee i.e; Rakesh Bansal HUF but did not accept the Jewellery shown in the Wealth Tax Returns of another persons belonging to the family of the assessee. In our opinion when the facts were similar, the contrary stand taken by the A.O. was not justified particularly whe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling Station only and no documentary evidence with regard to the cash belonging to other persons was furnished therefore the cash amounting to Rs. 24,00,000/- was seized. 17.1 The A.O. asked the assessee to reconcile the cash found with its books of account. In response the assessee submitted as under: "Regarding your Honour's query relating to the source of cash found at Rs. 24,78,045/- at the time of search on the residential premises of the assessee, it is submitted that the assessee has prepared month wise cash balances considering cash collection out of sales and deposit of cash into bank accounts till the date of search. Perusal of the details will reveal that the assessee had Rs. 19,48,725/- as cash in hand as on the date of search. But due to clerical mistake this figure was earlier reported at Rs. 20,81,525/-. In addition to this, as stated earlier and representation made before the Ld. D.I. for release of cash, the assessee is Managing Director of M/s.Sarvesh Spinners Pvt. Ltd., as per its cash book of the said company, there was also a cash balance of Rs. 2,27,282/- which was also lying with the assessee on the date of search. Further, the assessee was also acti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f M/s City Filing Station or Sarvesh Spinners Pvt. Ltd. and remained unexplained by the appellant. Since appellant was neither an employee nor was drawing any remuneration from City Filing Station or Sarvesh Spinners pvt. Ltd., the explanation of the appellant that it was cast from the business, cannot be accepted. The conclusions of the Assessing Officer are therefore on firm grounds and as per the facts. In the light of the above, I am of the opinion that the addition of Rs. 5,29,320/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash is justified. The ground of appeal is therefore dismissed." 19. Now the assessee is in appeal. 20. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee during the course of search duly explained the source of cash found but the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) doubted that the assessee was not an employee in the two concerns so cash belonging to the two concerns could not be found from the premises of the assessee. It was submitted that before the Ld. CIT(A) as well as in the assessment proceedings it was duly stated that the Head Office of M/s Barnal....