2023 (5) TMI 954

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT DR ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A)-24, New Delhi dated 21.02.2019. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi ['th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... CIT(A)'] has erred in upholding the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-08, New Delhi ('the Ld. Assessing Officer') in upholding the addition of Rs.16,77,368/- made under section 69A on account of alleged unexplained investment in jewellery." 3. A search & seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted in the case of Priyagold Group of cases ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icer calculated Long Term Capital Gains on the presumption that the jewellery "undetected" during the search was sold and determined LTCG of Rs.71,86,743/-. Hence, the question to decide before us is whether the AO can resort to determination of notional LTCG or not. The shortage of jewellery could have been questioned at the time of search and any evidence with regard to the sale of jewellery sho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ount of Long Term Capital Gains on the purported, notional, fictitious sale of jewellery be deleted. 5. With regard to the addition made u/s 69A, there were loose diamond as per the WTR and the jewellery seized of worth Rs.16,77,363/- which has been subsequently treated as unexplained investments. The submission of the assessee that the loose diamonds which were part of the Wealth Tax Return we....