TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1215
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt by making addition of Rs. 9,66,000/- u/s 69A of IT Act on account of unexplained jewellery. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the undersigned. 3. The Grounds of appeal relate to addition of Rs. 9,66,000/- u/s 69A of IT Act on account of unexplained jewellery. The relevant part of assessment order is as under: A search & seizure operations u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 was conducted on 27.11.2020 on the premises of M/s Shiv Shakti Construction. The business premise of the firm and residences of its partners and their associates were covered under the search operation. The assessee is one of the partners in M/s Daurau Farms LLP. The residential as well as business premises of the assessee were covered. In view of search operation the group cases were centralized to Central Circle II Noida. 2. Consequently, for the purpose of assessment, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 20/01/2022 was issued through ITBA Portal and duly served upon the assessee. Assessee has e-filed return of income on 28.12.2021 declaring total income as Rs. 3.90.510- Subsequently, notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 23.02.2022 through ITBA and duly served upon the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is as under:- S. No Person Allowable Limit 1. Shri Chander Pal (Husband) 100 gm 2. Smt. Preeti Singh (Self) 500gm 3. Smt. Draupadi Devi (Mother in law expired 2021) 500 gm 4. Master Anirudh Singh (son) 100gm 5. Master Shauraya Singh (son) 100gm Total 1300gm 5.4 Accordingly the allowable amount of jewelry comes out to be Rs. 51,11,030/- (1.20.34.513 Assessee 130030611. Hence, the remaining amount of unexplained jewelry comes out to be Rs. 69.23.4801-. As the asseessee has not furnished any bills/vouchers. wealth tas return and source of purchase of the jewelry found in her house and locker. Hence, the entire amount of Rs. 69,23.480 - is treated as unexplained. However, since the assessee was holding locker in PN Vasant Vihar Branch in which jewellery worth Rs. 9,66,000/- was found. Hence, the unexplained jewelry to the tune of Rs. 9,66,000/- is added in the hands of the assessee and the remaining jewellery is added in the hands of husband of the assessee Sh. Chander Pal. 4. In this regard, assessee filed written submission before the ld. CIT(A), the relevant portion of written submission is reproduced ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case of a person not assessed to wealth-tax gold jewellery and ornaments to the extent of 500 gms. permarried lady, 250 gms. per unmarried lady and 100 gms per male member of the family need not be seized. (iii) The authorised officer may, having regard to the status of the family, and the custom and practices of the community to which the family belongs and other circumstances of the case, decide to exclude a larger quantity of jewellery and ornaments from seizure. This should be reported to the Director of Income-tax/Commissioner authorising the search at the time of furnishing the search report (iv) In all cases, a detailed inventory of the jewellery and ornaments found must be prepared to be used for assessment purposes. These guidelines may please be brought to the notice of the officers in your region." 8. The appellant submits that the aforesaid jewellery was gifted to her on various occasions such as marriage, birth of children, etc.; such gifts are very common in Indian culture and society. Further, looking at the status of the family of which the appellant is a part, the quantum of such gift of jewellery is not uncommon and hence, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hauraya Singh (son) 100 gm Total 1300 gm 7. The moot issue in this appeal is whether the allowance of jewellery should be strictly restricted to 500 grms only as per the CBDT Circular or not. In this case the total jewellery found was 715 grms and the Revenue Authorities allowed 500 grms as per the circular and the equivalent value of the remaining 215 grms was considered as on undisclosed income and brought to tax. We have gone through the taxable income of the assessee for the last few years which is as under :- Assessment Year Returned Income 2012-13 14,83,855.00 2013-14 12,54,564.00 2014-15 14,17,162.00 2015-16 6,22,432.00 2016-17 7,03,688.00 2017-18 7,28,688.00 2018-19 7,24,690.00 2019-20 13,52,157.00 2020-21 8,48,060.00 2021-22 3,90,510.00 2022-23 4,90,970.00 8. The assessee stated that the income for all the years shows that the assessee has been earning substantial Income clearly establishing the status. It has time and again been held that due credit of the same has to be allowed by the assessing officer looking and appreciating the status, customs, and traditions relating to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, I am of the considered view that facts and circumstances of the present case are similar to the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and hence, the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision. 6.2 Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the status of the family and on the anvil of the judgement of the High Court of Delhi in the case of Ash ok Chadha vs. ITO reported in 14 taxmann.com 57 (Delhi.)/202 Taxman 395, the explanation given by the assessee's counsel is accepted. Accordingly the orders of the authorities below are cancelled and addition made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) amounting to Rs. 10,65,312/- on account of purported unexplained Jewellery claimed by the assessee is deleted. 7. In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed." 10. The Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi in the case of Vibhu Aggarwal vs. DCIT 93 taxmann.com 275 (Delhi - Trib.) held that where Assessing Officer under section 69A made addition on account of jewellery found in search of assessee, since assessee belonged to a wealthy family and jewellery was received ....