AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 345
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: "1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition made by the assessing officer on account of unexplained jewellery u/s. 69A to the extent of Rs. 22 ,20 ,698 /-. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition made by the assessing officer on account of unexplained cash u/s. 69 A to the extent of Rs. 24 ,91 ,700 /-." 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee referred to Grounds of Appeal and submitted that the assessee is aggrie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; Assessee-Mr. Prem Prakash Sethi - 100 gms; son-Shri Ishan Sethi - 100 gms; son-Aryan Sethi - 100 gms; Mother-Pushpa Sethi - 500 gms. The CIT(A) has thus confirmed the additions attributable to remaining 603.97 gms amounting to Rs.22,20,698/- as unexplained jewellery in the hands of the assessee under Section 69A of the Act. In this regard, the ld. counsel submitted that the remaining additions of jewellery weighing 603.97 gms confirmed by the CIT(A) is wholly unjustified. Adverting to submissions filed before CIT(A) dated 03.08.2021 placed in the paper book, the ld. counsel pointed out that it was submitted before the CIT(A) that the remaining jewellery 603.97 gms also includes jewellery belonging to the married daughter of the assessee w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n, was kept back with the assessee (father) and such conduct resonates with the ordinary customs of the Indian society. The ld. counsel thus submitted that the whole of jewellery found in possession when seen along with the jewellery found relatable to daughter, is slightly lesser than the total jewellery in question. The ld. counsel thus submitted that in the light of facts and evidence of clinching nature placed before the CIT(A), complete relief ought to have been granted by the first Appellate Authority while passing order under Section 250 of the Act. 6. As regards the other grievance viz., additions on account of unexplained cash found in the course of search amounting to Rs.24,91,700/-, the ld. counsel submitted that the aforesaid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the First Appellate Authority. Adverting to unexplained cash contested on behalf of the assessee, the ld. DR pointed out that the CIT(A) has applied his mind to the factual matrix and declined to entertain the farfetched plea of the assessee that said cash in hand belonging to the company and other family members is sourced out of cash available with the companies and other family members. 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the case records. The relevant pages of the paper book adverted to in the course of hearing has been taken into account in terms of Rule 18 (6) of the ITAT Rules, 1963. 10. As regards additions on account of unexplained jewellery, it is the case of the assessee that the additions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h concession is being given to bring an end to ongoing litigation. 11. We find traction in the aforesaid plea raised on behalf of the assessee. We are convinced with the assertions raised on behalf of the assessee that jewellery are, at times, kept by the married daughters with the maternal family. There is no warrant to deny credit of 500 gms on account of married daughter in terms of CBDT Instruction No. 1916 dated 11th May, 1994. The assessee thus gets the relief to the extent of 500 gms as against aggregate 603.97 gms for which the additions were sustained before the CIT(A). 12. In the result, Ground No.1 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. 13. Ground No.2 concerns additions on account of unexplained cash to the e....