TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 359
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h found during course of search Rs. 45,65,420/- and out of the this Rs. 40,00,000/- was seized and the balance amount of Rs. 5,65,420/- the source was explained. Thus, the addition confirmed has to be deleted. 3. For these and other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed." and pleaded that although the assessee has raised these grounds before the ld CIT(A) , due to oversight , these grounds were not raised in form 36 and hence pleaded to admit them in the interest of justice and dispose them on merit. 3. We heard the rival parties and admit the additional grounds . 4. The Ld. AR submitted that this appeal is directed against the inclusion of cash found during the course search to the tune of Rs. 45,65,420/- and alleged undisclosed investment in jewellery to the tune of Rs. 1,81,72,099/-. There was a search under Section 132 of the Act carried out on 07.08.2014 in the premises where the Appellant was residing along with his family members. The cash found was Rs. 45,65,420/- out of which Rs. 40 lakhs was seized. Similarly, gold jewellery/bullion, gold coins, diamond found was .4684640 grams o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Gupta and only balance of Rs. 5,65,420/- was required to be explained. The Appellant has provided evidence with regard to the availability of cash among the family members as enclosed in the Paper Book at Page No.1-23. Even this amount has been fully explained and thus no part of the impugned addition was required to be made. The CIT(A) having accepted the explanation, deleted the addition of Rs. 40 lakhs which was added by the AO. However, with regard to Rs. 5,65,420/- found, though the Appellant had provided explanation with regard to the availability of cash among the family members, declined to delete the addition against which the Appellant is in appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. 4.1. With regard to the addition towards jewellery of Rs. 1,81,72,099/-, as stated earlier, the value of jewellery has been reduced to Rs. 1,61,42,900/-. While the appeal was pending before the CIT(A), it was brought to the notice of the CIT(A) that rectification application with regard to the valuation of jewellery was pending before the AO, though the very addition was under challenge before him The Appellant made submissions with regard to declaration of jewellery in the hands of the Appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14-15 to the tune of Rs. 1.5 crores. Thus, the same was not includible in the hands of the Appellant. While declaring the jewellery, the entire jewellery found in addition to what has been declared in the wealth-tax returns by the respective family members had been considered. Thus, the Appellant did not invest any amount in jewellery to justify the impugned addition in his hands. The entire impugned addition made in this regard is accordingly liable to be deleted. In other words, the impugned additions as made, to the extent sustained by the CIT(A) are required to be deleted. Accordingly, it is prayed that the appeal may kindly be allowed. 5. Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that since the assessee relied on its pending rectification petition before the A O the ld CI(T(A) has disposed the appeal accordingly and hence supported the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material. With regard to the first issue, it is seen from page no. 1 of the paperbook dt 11.11.2020, that the assessee has explained the transaction before the lower authorities as under: "Date of search: 07.08.2014 Summary of Cash ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w, titled as gold and jewellery, for the ay 2013-14 at Rs. 8,962,000 and for the ay 2014-15 at Rs. 6,038,000 before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission as evidenced in page 28 of the paperbook, wherein Annexure-C- Cash Flow statement was placed. The undisclosed quantity of jewellery quantified by Shri Ravi Kumar Gupta in Annexure-D filed before the Settlement Commission included all the items found in the residential premise of the assessee. The Ld. AR further invited our attention to the paras 16.1, 16.2 and 19.1 of the order of the Hon'ble Settlement Commission, Chennai in Settlement Application no. TN/CN51/2017-18/IT dated 05.10.2018 which are extracted as under: "16.1 Bullion Trading: The PCIT mentioned that in the statement u/s. 132(4) of the Act on 26.08.2014, the applicant admitted undisclosed income of Rs. 60 crores on behalf of his entire group consisting business entities and his family members and subsequently filed a letter dated 26.09.2014 before the DDIT (Inv.) reiterating the above disclosure of Rs. 60 crores. In this regard, the breakup of the disclosure even by the applicant is as under: Shri Ravi Kumar Gupta Rs. 31.43 crores Sonal Vyapar Limited....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e settlement as extracted above. It is seen from the assessment order dated 29.12.2016 that the A O made the assessment recording the following reasons: " though the assessee's father Shri. Ravi Kumar Gupta has admitted an income of Rs. 1.50 crores towards undisclosed jewellery/bullion, diamond, silver articles found during the search operation in the residential premises of the assessee as his undisclosed income, Shri Ravi Kumar Gupta had not disclosed the said income in his return of income filed u/s. 153A of the Act. As per the provisions of section 132(4A) where any money/bullion/diamond, etc., is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a search such assets are presumed to belong to such person. In view of this the amount of Rs. 1,81,72,099/- representing the value of gold jewellery, diamond and silver articles found during search for which assessee could not explain the sources belongs to the assessee Shri Alok Gupta and the same is added as his undisclosed income for the financial year 2014-15 relevant to ay 2015-16." 7.2 In the above facts and circumstances, when the assessee furnished a copy of the order of the Settlement Commission bef....