PRATIMA DHERAI, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 39, MUMBAI

ITA 1144/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4975 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 05-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: KARAN LALA IZRFKHZ DH LS

Judgement Text

SMT PRATIMA DHERAI - 1 - VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K LH U;K;IHB EQACBZ ESAA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUM BAI JH VKJ- DS- XQIRK] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH JKTSUNZ FLAG YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJ ENDRA SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA[;K /ITA NO.1144/MUM/2012 FU/KKZJ.K O'KZ @ ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2009-10 SMT PRATIMA DHERAI 5.4-506, SAHYADRI BUILDING, NEELKANTH VALLEY, MUMBAI 400 077 CUKE@ VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -39, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI. PAN:- AJPPD7160G VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT VIHYKFKHZ DH VKSJ LS @ APPELLANT BY SHRI VIJAY MEHTA AND KARAN LALA IZR;FKHZ DH VKSJ LS @ RESPONDENT BY SHRI DEEPAK KUMAR SINHA VKNS'K@ VKNS'K@ VKNS'K@ VKNS'K@ ORDER PER RAJENDRA SINGH, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 9.12.2011 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-1 0. THE ONLY DISPUTE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARDING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SILVER UTENSILS U/S 69A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT A SEARCH U/S132 OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT HAD BEEN CONDUCTED IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 5.3.2009. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH JEWELLERY WORTH RS. 12,79,470/- AS PER THE R EPORT OF THE GOVERNMENT APPROVED VALUER WAS FOUND. AO OBSERVED THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF HEARING 5-09-2013 ?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 13-09-2013 SMT PRATIMA DHERAI - 2 - PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF JEWELLERY WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, WHICH WAS NOT COMPLIED W ITH. AO, THEREFORE, ADDED JEWELLERY WORTH RS. 7,79,470/- AFTER GIVING B ENEFIT OF RS. 5,00,000/- AS STRIDHAN U/S 69A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 3. THE ASSESSEE DISPUTED THE DECISION OF AO AND SUB MITTED BEFORE CIT(A) THAT AT THE TIME OF SEARCH GOLD JEWELLERY WE IGHING 411.8 GRAM VALUED AT RS. 5,29,180/-. DIAMOND JEWELLERY OF 14.1CTS VAL UED AT RS. 4,66,810/-. AND SILVER UTENSILS WEIGHING 14.5 KG AND VALUED AT RS. 2,83,480/- AGGREGATING TO RS. 12,79,470/- WERE FOUND. IT WAS S UBMITTED THAT CONSIDERING THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN THE FAMILY, TH E JEWELLERY FOUND WAS WITHIN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED IN THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO . 1916 DATED 11.5.1994 AND, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT IN CASE OF CIT VS. RATANLAL VYAPARILAL JAIN (235 CTR 5 68) NO ADDITION WAS REQUIRED TO BE MADE. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE S UBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE NOTED THAT IN THE INSTRUCTION NO. 1916, IT WAS HELD THAT IN CASE OF A PERSON NOT ASSESSED TO TAX, GOLD JEWELLERY AND OR NAMENTS TO THE EXTENT OF 500 GRAMS PER MARRIED LADY, 250 GRAMS PER UNMARRIED LADY AND 100 GRAMS PER MALE MEMBER OF THE FAMILY NEED NOT BE SEIZED. I NSTRUCTION, THEREFORE, RELATED ONLY TO GOLD JEWELLERY AND ORNAMENTS. FURTH ER IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE SILVER UTENSILS WORTH RS. 2,83,480/- WERE FOUND WHICH ARE NOT COVERED BY THE CBDT INSTRUCTIONS. CIT(A), THEREFORE , WHILE ALLOWING RELIEF IN RESPECT OF GOLD AND DIAMOND JEWELLERY RESTRICTED T HE ADDITION TO RS. 2,83,480/- OF SILVER UTENSILS. AGGRIEVED BY THE DEC ISION OF CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 4. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT AT THE TIME OF SEARCH SILVER UTENSILS WORTH RS. 2.83 LAKH WERE FOUND AND NOT ANY SILVER BAR ETC. THESE SILVER UTENSILS WERE ACQUIRED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME AS PER THE PREVALENT SOCIAL CUSTOMS AND, THEREFORE, REASONABLE NESS HAS TO BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF STATUS OF THE FAMILY. IT WAS POINTE D OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 7.78 LAKH IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND THE INCOME OF THE HUSBAND WAS 47.75 LAKH. THEREFORE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT SMT PRATIMA DHERAI - 3 - QUANTUM OF SILVER UTENSILS FOUND WAS REASONABLE AND HAS TO BE TREATED AS EXPLAINED. LEARNED DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS AND CONSIDERED THE M ATTER CAREFULLY. THE DISPUTE IS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 2.83 LAKH ON ACCOUNT OF SILVER UTENSILS. THESE UTENSILS WERE FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH AND HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE TREATING THE SOURCE AS NOT EXPLAINED. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT SILVER UTENSI LS ARE A COMMON HOUSE HOLD ARTICLES WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD ACQUIRED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME AND THE ASSESSEE BELONGING TO THE HIGH INCOME GROUP, THE SO URCE SHOULD BE TREATED AS EXPLAINED SATISFACTORILY. IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 7.78 LAKH IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED THE INCOME OF RS. 47.75 LAKH IN THAT YEAR IN WHICH UTENSILS WERE FOUND. IT HAS ALSO BEEN POINTED OUT IN THE EARLIER YEAR ALSO SUBSTANTIAL INCOME HAD BEEN REPOR TED BY ASSESSEE AND THE HUSBAND. IN OUR VIEW, CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIR CUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND THE FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE FAMILY AND CONSIDER ING THE SOCIAL CUSTOMS, THE SOURCE OF ACQUISITION OF SILVER UTENSILS WORTH RS. 2.83 LAKH HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED. WE ACCORDIN GLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DELETE THE ADDITION MADE. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 13-9-2013 SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (RAJENDRA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SKS SR. P.S, MUMBAI DATED 13.9.2013 SMT PRATIMA DHERAI - 4 - COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. THE DR, C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI