, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.MITTAL,(JM) AND SANJAY ARORA (AM) . . , , ./I.T.A. NO.167/MUM/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SMT.TRUPTI S KOTADIA 7, KARIM MANOR, 8, KRISHNA SANGHI MARG, GAMDEVI, MUMBAI-400007 / VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-35, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 ( ( / APPELLANT) .. ( ) ( / RESPONDENT) ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AABPK3638F ( /: APPELLANT BY SHRI BEHARILAL ) ( , / RESPONDENT BY SHRI GIRIJA DAYAL , . / DATE OF HEARING : 9.12.2013 , . /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.12.2013 / O R D E R PER B.R.MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 30.11.2011 STATING THAT T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,71,280/- MADE BY ASSESSING OF FICER ON THE GROUND THAT DIAMOND JEWELLERY TO THAT EXTENT DID NOT MATCH WITH THE VA LUATION REPORT. 2. BEFORE WE TAKE GROUNDS FOR OUR CONSIDERATION, WE MAY STATE THAT, THE AO MADE ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DIAMOND JEWELLE RY OF RS.2,60,251/- WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY LD. CIT(A) INSTEAD OF RS.2,71,280/-, AS STATED BY ASSESSEE IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL . 3. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3.1 WE OBSERVE THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(THE ACT) ON 15.8.2008 AT THE RESIDENT IAL AND BUSINESS PREMISES OF M/S DIMPLE DRUMS AND BARRELS PVT.LTD. AND ITS GROUP AS SOCIATES INCLUDING ITS I.T.A. NO.167/MUM/2012 2 DIRECTORS/PARTNERS. PURSUANT THERETO NOTICE U/ S 153A OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO ASSESSEE. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO HAS STATED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE PROCEEDINGS, APA RT FROM GOLD JEWELLERY, DIAMOND JEWELLERY WAS ALSO FOUND AMOUNTING TO RS.11,52,945 /-. THE AO STATED THAT ASSESSEE SURRENDERED DIAMOND JEWELLERY VALUING RS.3,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT OF THE VALUE OF THE DIAMOND JEWELLERY OF RS.2,71,280/-. AO, OVER AND ABOVE, MADE ADDITION OF RS.2,60,251/- UNDER THE HE AD DIAMOND JEWELLERY AND STATED THAT AS PER VALUATION REPORT DATED 30.8.1989, TH ERE WAS VARIANCE IN THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT AND THE ITEMS APPEARING AT SR.NO.13, SR .NO. 14, SR.NO. 15, SR.NO. 24, SR.NO. 26, SR.NO. 28, SR.NO. 36 AND SR.NO. 38 FOR THE AGG REGATING VALUE OF THESE ITEMS WHICH COMES TO RS.2,60,251/- ARE NOT MATCHING WITH THE ITEMS APPEARING IN THE VALUATION REPORT. THEREFORE, AO MADE ADDITION. 5. LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO INSPITE OF FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT, SHE HAD MADE DISCLOSURE OF ADDITION AL INCOME OF RS.3,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED DIAMOND JEWELLERY. 6. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCLOSED ADDITIONAL INCOME OF RS.3,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF DIAMOND JEWELLERY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,71,280/- DID NOT MATCH (IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE VALUE OF UNMA TCHED DIAMOND JEWELLERY IS AGGREGATING TO RS.2,60,251/-), WE ARE OF THE CONSID ERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO MAKE FURTHER ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT UNDER THE HEAD DIAMOND JEWELLERY OF RS.2,60,251/-. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR HAS ALSO NOT DISPUTED THE ABOVE FACT EXCEPT RELYI NG ON THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE DELETE THE SAID ADDITION OF R S.2,60,251/- AS CONFIRMED BY LD CIT(A) BY ALLOWING THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY A SSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 27 TH DECEMBER, 2013 , 1 2 27 TH DECEMBER, 2013 , SD SD ( / SANJAY ARORA) ( . . /B.R.MITTAL) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: ON THIS 27TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 I.T.A. NO.167/MUM/2012 3 . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ( / THE APPELLANT 2. ) ( / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 6 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. 6 / CIT CONCERNED 5. 7 )9 , . 9 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) . 9 , /ITAT, MUMBAI