The Delhi bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) has ruled that, Jewellery recieved after the partition cannot be treated as Unexplained.
The Tribunal heard an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by Ld.CIT(A) regarding the quantum of assessment passed under Section 143(3) and 153A.
In the instant case, search and seizure action under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act was carried out in D S Group of cases and assessee was covered under search and seizure operation. During the operation jewellery was found in the possession of assessee valued at Rs. 21,54,497/- on the jewellery found from the residence and Rs. 15,63,395/- on the jewellery found from the locker. Total jewellery found from the assessee weighed 1383.90 grms. Apart from that cash amounting to Rs. 5,25,000/- was also found and the A.O. added it as unexplained under Section 69A. The assessee’s claim before the A.O. that there was a partial partition of HUF and after the partition, only jewellery amounting to 683.10 gm was received by him which was rejected by the A.O. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) had partly confirmed the investment made on account of unexplained jewellery.
The ITAT on pursual of the contentions of both the parties, held that total quantity of jewellery aggregated to 1383.90gm. Out of it 872.05 gm had been stated to belong to assessee’s wife and in support of that valuation report of jewellery has been relied upon. The finding of ld.CIT(A) which had not accepted assessee’s contention that value of wealth on return filed 19 years earlier had continued till date of search was not accepted by the ITAT. It held that particular reason cannot be held to be tenable without any contrary material found during the search. The ITAT also approved the availability of jewellery with HUF. With regard to the cash, out of the total sum of Rs. 5,25,000/- a sum of Rs. 2,25,000/- was accepted as cash withdrawal and tribunal gave a relief to the assessee to the tune of said amount. The appeal was partly allowed by ITAT.
