MEENU GOEL, DELHI V. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

ITA 1286/DEL/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3146 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 01-04-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANAS SHANKAR RAY
• Keywords: Gift; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1286/DEL/2022 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Meenu Goel, vs. ACIT, 11-A, Anand Lok, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 049. (PAN : AANPG9284H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Dr. Manas Shankar Ray, Advocate Shri Ansual Gondala, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 02.04.2024 Date of Order : 04.04.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-30, New Delhi dated 13.05.2022 for the assessment years 2017-18. 2. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- “1. The learned CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal and confirming the addition of Rs.45,02,050/- u/s 69 of the IT Act which is unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts and circumstances of the case as well as against the provisions of law. 2. The learned CIT (A) has erred in dismissing and confirming the search and assessment which is also unjustified, 2 ITA No.1286/DEL/2022 against the provisions of law besides being the concept of natural justice and equality.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that in this case, addition was made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on account of silver jewellery in the form of silver coins and bricks found in Locker No.L-375 held with M/s. Alaknanda Lockers, Saket, New Delhi in the name of the assessee. The assessee claimed that they were inherited and gifted. However, AO noted that no evidence was produced in support of the claim. So basing upon the observation that evidence in support of the jewellery found was not produced, AO held that the said jewellery is treated as unexplained and made the addition of Rs.45,02,050/- under section 69A of the Act. 4. Before the ld. CIT (A), assessee submitted the affidavits from the persons from whom he claimed that the gifts were received. However, ld. CIT (A) observed that these were not produced before the AO. He further observed that the affidavits cannot be admitted under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules in the appellate proceedings and accordingly confirmed the action of the AO. 5. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee was never asked to provide the source of the jewellery and he submitted that necessary 3 ITA No.1286/DEL/2022 evidences were produced before the ld. CIT (A) but he did not admit the same. 7. Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 8. We find that it is the plea of the assessee that assessee was never confronted of the issue of source of silver bricks and coins found. Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed certain evidences produced. In our considered opinion, interest of justice would be served if the issue is remitted to the file of AO. Assessee is directed to provide the necessary details of source of jewellery found before the AO. Thereafter, the AO shall decide the case as per law, after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 4 th day of April, 2024. Sd/- sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated the 4 th day of April, 2024 TS Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT (A)-30, New Delhi. 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.