TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 1092
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and the ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the sum of Rs. 4,57,404/- out of the same whereas the assessee is having every reason and justification for deletion of the same.'' 2.1 The assessee is an individual and derives income from salary and other sources. Search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 14-10-2015 in the case of Data Group and the assessee was also covered by the said search and seizure action. During the course of search, gold and silver jewellery valued at Rs. 32,71,895/- were found from the residential premises of the assessee. The bifurcations of gold and silver jewellery value are as under:- Gold jewellery items Rs. 31,38,245/- Silver jewellery items Rs. 1,33,650/- Total Rs. 32,71,895/- In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... addition made by the AO on account of unexplained silver items by holding that 50% of silver items found during the course of search is a reasonable holding of the assessee family by considering the status and standing of the family. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal. 2.2 Before us, the ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee during the course of search has explained the jewellery to the extent of 343.328 gms. purchased by him alongwith bills and vouchers which are also recorded in the books of account of the assessee and his family members. The ld.AR further submitted that the benefit of CBDT Instruction No. 1916 is available to the assessee in respect of jewellery rece....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... gms. of jewellery by considering the same as reasonable in view of the CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11-05-1994 then the jewellery purchased by the assessee within the said limit of 850 gms. cannot be separately allowed as explained jewellery. Thus the reasonable possession of jewellery as explained in the CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11-05-1994 includes all kinds of acquisition by family/ members of the family and it does not distinguish the mode of acquisition. The ld. DR thus relied on the orders of the lower authorities. Further, the ld. DR submitted that the AO has made total addition of Rs. 9,76,895/- on account of unexplained gold jewellery and silver items. However, the ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition of Rs. 4,57,404/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llery then the same cannot be treated as unexplained jewellery of the assessee. The AO has denied the benefit of the said quantity of jewellery on the ground that since the benefit of reasonable jewellery to the extent of 850 gms. as per CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11-05-1994 is already granted, therefore, to that extent, no further benefit can be granted. It is pertinent to note that CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11-05-1994 has explained in case of gold jewellery found in the possession of the assessee during the course of search and seizure action and the assessee is not able to explain the same then the quantity prescribed under the said CBDT Instruction No. 1916 in respect of married female member, unmarried female member and male....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e explained jewellery acquired by the assessee. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstance of the case, the quantity of jewellery to the extent of 343.328 gms. has to be allowed separately as explained jewellery and no addition can be made to that extent. 2.6.1 As regards the valuation of gold jewellery, we find that the AO has valued the entire jewellery by applying the prevailing rate of 2700/- per gram and by ignoring the fact of actual cost of acquisition to the extent of 343.328 gms. at Rs. 4,57,404/- as reflected in the purchase bills as well as in the books of account of the assessee. Therefore, we do not find any error or illegality to the extent of value of said jewellery accepted by the ld. CIT(A). Hence, the addition sustained b....