No addition can be made on assessee, if ownership of Jewellery belongs to Family Members: ITAT [Read Order]
![No addition can be made on assessee, if ownership of Jewellery belongs to Family Members: ITAT [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/No-addition-can-be-made-on-assessee-addition-assessee-ownership-of-Jewellery-belongs-to-Family-Members-ownership-of-Jewellery-ITAT-Taxscan.jpg "No addition can be made on assessee, if ownership of Jewellery belongs to Family Members: ITAT [Read Order]")
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that no addition could be made on assessee, if ownership of jewellery belongs to family members. Ashok Kumar Tyagi, the taxpayer, filed the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [CIT(A)]. The facts leading to the case was a search & seizure operation was conducted under section...
The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that no addition could be made on assessee, if ownership of jewellery belongs to family members.
Ashok Kumar Tyagi, the taxpayer, filed the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [CIT(A)].
The facts leading to the case was a search & seizure operation was conducted under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at the residential and business premises of the assessee.
During the proceedings, the AO made an addition of Rs.7,03,200/- on account of the cash and jewellery found during the search.
Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)] who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, the assessee filed a second appeal before the tribunal.
The tribunal after reviewing the facts noted that jewellery has been separately valued in different names of the family members namely, The punchnama drawn has also clearly mentioned the fact of the ownership of the jewellery with various people. Hence, the addition ought not to be made in the hands of the assessee.
Further, it was also observed that on day of search itself revealed that the assets pertain to assessee's father Jaiveer Tyagi and other family members
Hence, a bench consisting of two members, Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, (Accountant Member) Yogesh Kumar US, (JudicialMember reviewed the arguments presented by both parties. The bench concluded that the jewellery found during the search operation was not in the ownership of assessee and also which was in the ownership of assess’s relatives.
Thus, the bench deleted the addition made by the assessing officer.
Sachin Jain, counsel apperad for the assesee and P. Praveen Sidharth, counsel appeared for the revenue.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
