TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 973
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cts in the captioned appeals are so intertwined, for the sake of convenience and brevity, we decided to dispose off all these appeals by this common order. 3. The bone of contention in the captioned appeals relates enhancement made by CIT(A) in respect of jewellery and property at D-6/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi and property at E-27, Vasant Marg, New Delhi. 4. In the case of Lata Goyal the assessee claimed exemption u/s.5 (vi) for property E-27, Vasant Marg, New Delhi and following the order for earlier assessment years the WTO allowed the exemption. 5. In the case of Monila Goyal assessee claimed exemption u/s. 5 (vi) for property D-6/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi and following the orders of earlier assessment years the exemption was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (vi) of the Act. Accordingly the CIT(A) issued a notice of enhancement to the appellants. 11. It was explained that during search proceedings at the premises of the appellants on 17.12.2012 jewellery of 4 persons namely Lata Goyal, Dinesh Kumar Goyal, Monali Goyal and Kanti Kumar Goyal were mixed and valued by the departmental valuer. It was further explained that the jewellery was in the custody of the department as on 31.03.2013 and the appellants have furnished the details in their respective Wealth Tax Returns relying upon their memories. 12. This explanation of the appellants did not find any favour with the CIT(A) who made enhancement in respect of jewellery in the hands of Lata Goyal Rs. 54,23,565/-, in the hands of Monali Goy....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hether there is any suppression of jewellery. The total jewelery of the family as per search is given in the following chart:- 17. As per wealth tax return jewelery declared by the family members which also included another family member Kanti Kumar Goyal and his HUF is as under :- 18. From the above chart it can be seen that the gross value of jewellery of three appellants was marginally increased from 10181 grams to 10372 grams and when jewellery of Kanti Kumar Goyal and Kanti Kumar HUF is also included then gross value of Jewellery decreased from 10911 grams to 10848 grams. 19. Considering the above facts and the fact that during the course of search and subsequent opening of lockers the jewellery of all the family members were ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... High Court allowed the exemption in respect of assessee's building which consisted four shop rooms. 22. In the property D-6/5, Vassant Vihar, Lata Goyal is the owner of ground floor and first floor belongs to Monila Goyal and second floor belongs to Lata Goyal and Kanti Kumar Goyal E-27, Vasant Marg is owned by Lata Goyal. Lata Goyal has claimed exemption in respect of E-27, Vasant Marg and has included the value D-6/5, Vasant Vihar in her Wealth Tax Return. 23. In our considered opinion treating a multi floor house as separate units is incorrect and, therefore, denial of the claim of exemption by CIT(A) thereby enhancing the value of property is bad in law and deserves to be deleted. 24. We accordingly direct the WTO to delete th....