TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 1428
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed 18-3-2015. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: '(1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well in law, the CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the learned Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2, Surat (for the sake of brevity "The AO") in making addition of Rs. 1,36,406/- u/s. 69A of the Act for the alleged unexplained jewellery, purely on presumptions, assumptions and allegations and much less, in the absence of any material contrary to the submissions, explanations with evidences furnished, is without jurisdiction, perverse bad in law and liable to be quashed. (2) Your appellant further reserves his right to add, alter modify or to amend any of the aforesaid grounds before or at the time o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... However, ld. CIT(A), has confirmed the action of Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The crux of the controversy before us is that whether assessee's claim falls within the ambit of CBDT's Instruction No. 1916, dated 11-5-1994? Therefore, before we proceed to adjudicate the issue, it would be appropriate to note the guidelines mentioned in CBDT Instruction No. 1916, dated 11-5-1994, which is reproduced below for ready reference: "INSTRUCTION NO. 1916, DATED 11-5-1994 SECTION 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 - SEARCH AND SEIZURE -GENERAL - GUIDELINES FOR SEIZURE OF JEWELLERY AND ORNAMENTS IN COURSE OF SEARCH INSTRUCTION NO. 1916, DATED 11....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7.95 carats of diamonds. Learned Counsel has submitted before the Bench that there are three married ladies and three married males in the family besides two minors. Thus, we note that as per CBDT Instruction No. 1916, dated 11-5-1994 (supra), the gold jewellery and ornaments to the extent of 500 grams per married lady, 250 grams per unmarried lady and 100 grams per male member of the family need not be seized by the search team. We note that gold seized was only 636.790 grams embedded with diamonds of 7.95 carats, which is below the limit prescribed by the CBDT in the said instruction. The ld. Counsel submits before the Bench that these diamonds were not separated with gold, these were embedded in the gold and total value of the gold incl....