TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 527
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... direct the respondent No.1 to accord the approval for release of the seized gold jewellary weighing 524.500 grams of the petitioner. (b) quash and set aside the seizure of the gold jewellary being stock-in- trade of business of the petitioner carried out by respondent No.4; (c) direct the respondent NO.4 to release the seized gold jewellary of the petitioner. (d) any other and further relief deemed just and proper by granted in the interest of justice; (e) to provide for the cost of this petition." 2 The facts giving rise to this writ application may be summarized as under: 3 It appears from the materials on record that the writ applicant is engaged in the business of Gold Jewellary. The writ applicant filed his return of in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unsel appearing for the Revenue. 8 We need to consider the principal argument of Mr. M. R. Bhatt, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revenue that the writ applicant is not entitled to claim back the seized articles i.e. the gold jewellary because the writ applicant is the receiving party and the addition made by the respondent No.3 was made on protective basis on account of the seizure of the jewellary. According to Mr. Bhatt, the sender party (consignor) is M/s. Parv Kundan and Diamonds Private Limited. Addition was made in the hands of M/s. Parv Kundan and Diamonds Private Limited on the basis of such jewellary seized weighing 524.500 gms. resulting into the demand of Rs. 34,99,560/- and penalty under Section 271AAC of the Act.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... parcels i.e gold/jewellery. In the statement recorded u/s. 132(4) both the persons have confirmed that the items from the said parcels were to be delivered to the various persons at Rajkot. The said gold jewellery was related to the job work, purchases or repairing purposes. It was also noticed that both the above carriers were in whose possession said parcels were found and seized were not the real owners of the parcels and in the statement recorded they have provided correct details of the sender and receiver parties of such parcels. So proceedings u/s. 153A of IT Act were initiated in both the cases and during the proceedings u/s.153A the satisfaction was drawn to initiate proceedings u/s.153C of IT Act in the case of assessee also. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inancial statement for the F.Y. 2017-18. e) Copy of VAT Annual Return and GST Annual Return for the F.Y. 2017-18. 12.4 Further, it was submitted that the purchases have been duly accounted for as per the bills received and the material reached through the courier and payments have also made through cheques. The stock was entered in the books of accounts. Therefore, there was no reason to make the addition. It was further pointed out that the provisions of Section 69A are not applicable in the case of appellant. The transactions were business transactions and duly accounted for in the books of accounts, therefore, the pre condition to apply section 69A that those are to be unaccounted transactions does not get satisfy. 12.5 Having cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the books of accounts and payment has been made through banking channels. Thus, irrespective of the above version of the aforesaid party the said purchases in the hands of appellant would not be regarded as unaccounted as it has already been recorded in the books of accounts. For such purchases it is not the case of the AO that the purchases was inflated or bogus one. Hence in that case also no disallowance was warranted. 12.7 In view of the above discussion, the additions made by the AO is not correct more so when the documentary evidences in respect of the transactions were verifiable from the books of the appellant. Thus there was no case made out by the AO about the unexplained investments in the gold jewellery by the appellant. Th....