Ruta S Jindal, Noida V. ACIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 5279/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 527920114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 27-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK WADEKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SALIL AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ES : F , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO . 5279 /DEL/201 2 A.Y. 200 9 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL II C 95, NEHRU NAGAR GHAZIABAD VS. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE GHAZIABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH.SA L IL AGRAWAL, ADV. AND SH.SHAILESH GUPTA, CA . DEPARTMENT BY : SH. VI VEK WADEKAR, CIT, DR ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) , GHAZIABAD DATED 28 .8.201 2 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 200 9 - 10 . 2. THE FACTS AS BROUGHT OUT BY THE LD.CIT(A) FROM THE STATEMENT OF FACTS S UBMITTED BEFORE HIM BY THE AO IS AT PARA 3 OF THE ORDER WHICH IS EXTRACTED FOR READY REFERENCE. THE APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDING AT IIC - 95, NEHRU NAGAR, GHAZIABAD IN A JOINT FAMILY WITH HER HUSBAND MR. SUNIL JINDAL, FATHER - IN - LAW SHRI VIJAY JINDAL, HER MOTHER - IN - LAW SMT. CHAMELI DEVI , HER GRAND FATHER - IN - LAW SHRI SAT PAL, GRAND MOTHER - IN - LAW SMT. SHEELA DEVI. ON 14 - 10 - 2008 , A SEARCH U/S 132 WAS CONDUCTED AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND TOTAL JEWELLERY VALUED AT RS. ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 2 1,03,66,9821 - WAS FOUND FROM THE HOUSE. PANCHNAMAS WERE PREPARED IN THE NAMES OF LADIES ONLY. DETAILS OF JEWELLERY FOUND AR E AS UNDER: - JEWELLERY FOUND AS ON 14.10.2008 N A M E J EWE LL E R Y V A LU E O N T H E JEWELLERY VA LU E OF JEWELLERY V ALU E O F FOUND ON TH E D A T E OF SEIZE D J EWE LL ERY N O T J EW E LL E R Y D A T E OF 14 . 10 . 2008 SEIZE D SEIZED N OT SE I ZE D SE I ZER 14. 1 0.2008 CHAMELI 4 1 28.70 7 , 06 , 837 / - 2 915.8 42 , 55 , 053 / - 1212 . 9 2 8 , 07 , 780 / - DE V I GR A MS G R A M S GRAM S SHEEL A DEVI 603 . 70 8 , 01 , 90 / / - 603 . 70 8,0 , 1 900 / - G R A M S GR A MS RUTA L IN D A L 1 502.60 25 , 02 , 245 / - 4 14 . 30 6 , 35 , 000 / - 9 87.30 1 8 , 67 , 245 / - GRAMS GR A MS T O TA L I 6235.00 1 , 0 3 , 66 , 9 82 / - 3330 .10 48 , 9 0 , 0 53 / - 54 , 76 , 925 / - DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN JEWELLERY FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE AND HER FAMILY OWNED FOLLOWING JEWELLERY AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. JEWELLERY AVAILABLE AS PER RECORDS WITH EACH MEMBERS NAME OF THE MEMBER JEWELLERY HELD AS ON 31.3.1999 IN GRAMS VALUE OF JEWELLERY HELD AS ON 31.3.1999 VALUE AS ON 14.10.2008 AS PER RATE APPLIED BY THE VALUER AT THE TIME OF SEARCH RS. CHAMELI DEVI SINCE THIS INCLUDES DIMOND STUDDED JEWELLERY. THIS HAS BEEN VALUED AT RS.34,06,696/ - ON I 31.03.20081 THEREFORE, VA L UE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH IS ADOPTED THE SAME. 1,555.01 34,06,696/ - JEWELLERY DECLARED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH PERTAINING TO THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2008 TO 13.10.2008 IN THE CASE OF CHAMELI DEVI. 2,400.00 30,00,000/ - ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 3 VIJAY JINDAL JEWELLERY HELD SINCE 1.4.1999 (LET OUT OF VDIS) 409.00 5,11,250/ - JEWELLERY DECLARED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH PERTAINING TO THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2008 TO 13.10.2008 IN THE CASE OF VIJAY JINDAL. 2,400.00 30,00,000/ - SHEELA DEVI 603.70 8,01,900/ - SATPAL: OLD 70 TO LAS CONVERTED INTO GRAMS 812.00 LEFT OUT OF DECLARED UNDER VDIS 316.34 GRAMS 812.00 316.34 10,15,000/ - 3,95,425/ - RUTA JINDAL 696.00 8,70,000/ - TOTAL JEWELLERY HELD BY THE FAMILY RESIDING AT II C/95, NEHRU NAGAR 9182.05 GMS 1,29,99,671/ - 3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT : (A) THE EXCESS GOLD FOUND IN THE ASSESSEE S ROOM ACTUALLY BELONGS TO HER FATHER - IN - LAW AND MOTHER - IN - LAW; (B) THE VALUE OF 60 TOLAS OF GOLD AS ON DATE OF SEARCH I.E. 14.10.2008 WAS NOT GIVEN CREDIT AND VALUE OF 60 TOLAS GOLD AS ON DATE OF MARRIAGE IN THE YEAR 2002 WAS GIVEN CREDIT. 4 . AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AFTER CONSIDERING THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE VALUE OF JEWELLERY FOUND IN THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE, I N EXCESS OF 60 T O LAS, WHICH WAS STHREE DHAN , ACTUALLY BELONG TO THE FATHER IN LAW AND MOTHER IN LAW BUT WAS LYING IN HER ROOM AND IN HER POSSESSION . HOWEVER, THE LD.CIT(A) GRANTED REDUCTION OF THE VALUE OF THE JEWELLERY AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, IN STEAD OF VALUE OF THE ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 4 JEWELLERY AS ON 2002. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED IN THE FOLLOWING WORDS. HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT S ARGUMENT THAT REST OF THE JEWELLERY WAS BELONGING TO FATHER - IN - LAW AND WAS LYING IN HER POSSESSION, IS NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: (A) NO SUCH STAND WAS TAKEN DURING SEARCH. THE APPELLANT SHOULD HAVE POINTED OUT, DURING INVENTORISATION THAT A PORTION OF JEWELLERY FOUND IN POSSESSION WAS ACTUALLY BELONGING TO HER FATHER - IN - LAW AND MOTHER - IN - LAW. (B) IF SOME OF THE JEWELLERY OF FATHER - IN - LAW AND MOTHER - IN - LAW WERE GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT; THEN SOME OF THE ITEMS OF JEWELLERY AS APPEARING IN THE LIST OF JEWELLERY OF FATHER - IN - LAW AND MOTHER - IN - LAW, SHOULD HAVE TALLIED WITH THE ITEMS FOUND IN POSSESSION ( AS PER INV ENTORY) OF THE APPELLANT AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. BUT THE COUNSEL HAS BEEN UNABLE TO MAKE ANY SUCH TALLY OF ANY ITEM OF JEWELLERY!!. THEREFORE, THE BALANCE OF THE JEWELLERY FOUND I.E. JEWELLERY AMOUNTING TO RS. 13,02,245/ - ( RS. 25,02,245 ( - ) RS. 12,00,000/ - ) IS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY AND IS REQUIRED TO BE ADDED AS INCOME OF THE APPELLANT FROM UN - DISCLOSED SOURCES ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT. THE ADDITION OF RS. 22,02,245/ - IS THUS RESTRICTED TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 13,02,245 / - . 5 . AGGRI EVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. 1. THAT THE ALD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING AN ADDITION OF RS.13,02,245/ - REPRESENTING THE VALUE OF JEWELLERY FOUND DURING SEARCH AND TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 5 2. THAT IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.13,02,245/ - THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN JOINT FAMILIES LIVING TOGETHER IN THE SAME HOUSE JEWELLERY IS NOT NECESSARILY KEPT IN WATER TIGHT SEPARATE ROOMS/LOCKERS, AND IT IS THE TOTAL JEWEL LERY FOUND FROM THE FAMILY RESIDING IN THE SAME PREMISES IS TO BE EXPLAINED. 3. THAT ADDITION OF RS.13,02,245/ - HAVING BEEN WRONGLY SUSTAINED BE DELETED. 6 . HEARD SHRI SALIL AGRAWAL, ADVOCATE, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI VIVEK WADEKAR, LD.C IT, D.R. ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 7 . THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY HIM BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. HE POINTED OUT TO THE TOTAL JEWELLERY FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE VALUE OF THE JEWELL ERY , BY FURNISHING A CHART. THE CHART EXPLAINED THE JEWELLERY FOUND IN SEARCH ON 14.10.2008 AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE, AND THEIR STAND IN RESPECT IVE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ASSESSMENTS AND A PPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WERE FINALISED , IN CASE OF EACH OF THE FAMILY MEMBER. THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE CAN BE SUMMARISED AS FOLLOWS. ( A ) THE FACTUM OF AVAILABILITY OF JEWELLERY A S PER CHART B IS NOT IN DISPUTE AND HAS BEEN DULY ACCEPTED BY THE AO. CHART B READS AS FOLLOWS. CHART B NAME OF THE M E MBER JEWELLERY VALUE OF JWELLERY HELD HELD AS ON AS ON 31 . 03 . 1999 31 . 03.1999 V A L UE A S O N 14.10.2008 I N GRAMS AS PE R R A TE A P PLI E D BY TH E V A LU E R AT THE TIME O F SEARCH ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 6 CHAM E LI D E VI [ S I NCE T H I S I NC L UDES D I AMOND 1 , 555.01 3 , 406 , 096 STUDDED J EWELLERY. THIS HAS BEEN V A LU E D AT 34,06,096/ - A S ON 31 . 03.2008 . AS PER W . T. RETURN FOR AY 2008 - 09 . THEREFO R E VA LU E O N THE DA T E O F SEA R CH I S ADOPTED T H E SAME . JEWE LL E R Y DEC L A R ED A T THE TI ME O F SEA R CH PERTA I N I NG 2 , 400 . 00 3 , 000 , 000 T O THE PERIOD FROM 01.04 .2 008 T O 13 . 10.2008 I N T HE CASE OF CHAME LI DEV I . VIJAY JIND A L JEWEL L ERY HE L D S I NCE 0 1 . 04.1999 [ LEFT 409 . 00 51 1, 250 OUT O F VDIS ] VALUE DECLAR E D IN W.T. FOR 08 - 09 IS RS.6074 8 5/ - JEWELLERY DECLARED AT THE T I ME OF SEARCH PERTAINING 2 , 400.00 3 , 000 , 000 TO THE PERIOD FROM 01.04 . 2008 TO 13.10.2008 I N THE CASE OF V I JAY JINDAL . R UTA JI NDA L 696.00 870 , 000 SHEE L A DEV I 603.70 801 , 900 SAT PA L OLD 70 TO L AS CONVERTED INTO GRAMS 812.00 812 . 00 1 , 015 , 000 LEFT OUT OF DECLARED UNDE R VD I S 316 . 34 G R AMS. 316 . 34 395 , 425 T OTA L J EWELLERY HE L D BY T H E F AM ILY R ES I D IN G A T 11 - 9 1 82 .05 12,999,671 C/ 95 NEHRU NAGA R G R A MS ( B ) THE AO ACCEPTS THAT WHEN JOINT FAMILY IS LIVING TOGETHER IN THE SAME HOUSE, THEN THE JEWELLERY FOUND IN ONE ROOM CANNOT BE TREATED AS ONLY BELONGING TO THE LADY LIVING IN THE ROOM SIMPLY BECAUSE ANNEXURE TO PANCHNAMA HAS BEEN DRAWN IN THE NAME OF THE L ADY, THOUGH NO WARRANT HAS BEEN ISSUED AGAINST THE LADY. (C ) IT IS CLEAR THAT CERTAIN JEWELLERY RECORDED IN THE PANCHNAMA DRAWN IN THE NAME OF THE LADY , WAS CONSIDERED AS JEWELLERY OF MALE MEMBERS ON WHOSE NAME WARRANT OF SEARCH HAS BEEN DRAWN UP. THI S IS EVIDENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT OF SHRI VIJAY JINDAL AND SHRI SUNIL J INDAL. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT IN T HE ROOM OF THE MOTHER IN LAW AND FATHER IN LAW OF THE ASSESSEE, JEWELLERY THAT WAS FOUND, WAS LESSER THAN WHAT WAS DECLARED AND TREATED AS EXPLAINED, WHILE IN THE OTHER ROOM WHEN THE SON AND DAUGHTER IN LAW RESIDE , THE JEWELLERY OF THE SAME VALUE WAS FOUND . THE ANNEXURE DISCLOSES WHAT WAS DECLARED BY THE DAUGHTER IN LAW. ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 7 ( D ) RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE ORDE R OF TH E LD.CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF SMT. CHAMELI DEVI, THE MOTHER IN LAW OF THE ASSESSEE , AND T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN THE CASE OF SH. SUNIL J INDAL . 7 .1. LD.DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT , ON THE DATE OF THE SEARCH, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT EXPLAIN THA T THE EXCESS JEWELLERY ACTUALLY BELONGS TO HER MOTHER IN LAW. HE SUBMITS THAT THIS EXPLANATION IS AN AFTER THOUGHT. FURTHER HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ITEMS OF JEWELLERY AS APPEARING IN THE LIST OF JEWELLERY OF FATHER IN LAW AND MOTHER IN LAW HAS NOT TALLIED WITH THE ITEMS OF JEWELLERY ;FOUND IN THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE. HE REL IED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND PRAYED THAT THE SAME BE UPHELD. 8 . IN REPLY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NO STATEMENT WAS RECORDED FROM THE ASSESSEE AT T HE TIME OF SEARCH AND ONLY AN INVENTORY OF THE GOLD JEWELLERY WAS MADE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR THE ASSESSEE TO STATE THE FACTS AT THE TIME OF SEARCH OR THEREAFTER. THUS HE SUBMITS THAT AT THE FIRST AVAILABLE OPPORTUNITY, THE ASSESSE E EXPLAINED THE CORRECT POSITION. 9 . AFTER HEAR ING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSING THE PAPERS ON RECORD, ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE HOLD AS FOLLOWS. 10 . THE TOTAL JEWELLERY FOUND AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS AS UNDER. CHART - A JEWELL E RY VALUE AS NAME IN WHICH ANNEXURE IS DRAWN FOUND ON THE DETERMINED BY DATE OF SEIZER THE DEPARTMENT 14.10. 2 008 ON THE DATE OF 14.10.2008 IN RUPEES ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 8 CHAMPA JINDAL C OMMO N NAME OF CHAME L I DEV I GOLD NET WE I GHT 6 , 080,037 [ MOTHER - IN - LAW OF THE APPELLANT ) 3279 . 5 GRAMS DIAMONDS 232 C T . CHAMELI DEV I L MOTHER - IN - LAW OF THE APPELLANT 1 GOLD NET WE I GHT 982 , 820 ANNEXURE J OF PANCHNAMA IN RESPECT OF LOCKER 849.2 GRAMS NO. 688 OF PNB , LOHIA NAGAR , GHAZIABAD RUTA J I NDAL [APPELLANT] A T RES I DENCE GOLD NET WEIGHT 2 , 502 , 245 ANNEXURE - J - 1 O F PANCHNAMA DT, 1 5 . 10 . 2008 1502 . 60 GRAM S SHEELA DEV I [ GRAND MOTHER - IN - LAW OF THE GOLD NET WE I GH T 801 , 900 APPELLANT] A T RES I DENCE 603.70 G R AMS TOTAL OF JEWELLERY FOUND FROM IIC - 95, 6235 . 00 10,366,982 NEHRU NAGAR, GHAZIABAD GRAM S THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING CHART WHICH GIVES THE DETAILS AS TO HOW EACH MEMBER OF THE FAMILY HAVE DISCLOSED THE RESPECTIVE GOLD AND JEWELLERY IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURNS OF INCOME AND AS TO HOW THE AO AND WHEREVER THE ASSESSEE HAD GONE IN APPEAL, THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAD DEALT WITH THE DISCLOSURE. THIS IS EXTRACTED BELOW. CHART SHOWING EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF JEWELLERY FOUND IN SEARCH ON 14.10.2008 AT II C - 95, NEHRU NAGAR, GHAZIABAD TENDERED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY IN THEIR RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND POSITION OF ASSESSMENT AND APPEALS BEFORE CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF EACH MEMBER. NAME OF THE MEMBER JEWELLERY HELD AS ON 31.3.1999 IN GRAMS VALUE AS ON 14.10.2008 AS PER RATE APPLIED BY THE VALUER AT THE TIME OF SEARCH IN RUPEES POSITION OF ASSESSMENT IN THE CASES OF EACH MEMBER FINAL POSITION AS ON DATE VIJAY JINDAL JEWELLERY HELD SI NCE 1.4.99 (LEFT OUT OF VD IS) 409.00 511,250 REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN JEWELLERY FOR VALUE OF RS.9536372/ - I.E. JEWELLERY FOUND FROM THE ROOMS OF VIJAY JINDAL AND HIS WIFE AND SUNIL JINDAL AND RUTA JINDAL (THE ACCEPTING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, NO ADDITION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF JEWELLERY BY AO COPY OF ASSESSMENT ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 9 APPELLANT) ORDER IS ON PAGES 55 - 57 OF PAPER BOOK. JEWELLERY DECLARED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH PERTAINING TO THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2008 TO 13.10.2008 IN THE CASE OF VIJAY JINDAL 2.400.00 3,000,000 IN EXPLANATION COMMON CHART PLACED ABOVE WAS RELIED UPON. - DO - SUNIL JINDAL HUSBAND OF RUTA JINDAL REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN JEWELLERY FOR VALUE OF RS.95,63,372/ - I.E. JEWELLERY FOUND FROM THE ROOMS OF VIJAY JINDAL AND HIS WIFE AND SUNIL JINDAL AND RUTA JINDAL (THE APPELLANT) ACCEPTING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, NO ADDITION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF JEWELLERY BY AO. CHAMELI DEVI SINCE THIS INCLUDES DIAMOND STUDDED JEWELLERY. THIS HAS BEEN VALUED AT RS.34,06,096.00 AS ON 31.3.2008. THEREFOR E VALUE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH IS ADOPTED THE SAME 1555.01 IN EXPLANATION COMMON CHART PLACED ABOVE WAS RELIED UPON. COPY OF REPLY AND CHART IS PLACED AT PAGE 62 - 66 OF PAPER BOOK SEE PAGE 46 AND 47 CIT(A) ACCEPTED THAT JEWELLERY WORTH THE VALUE OF RS.8339150/ - WAS EXPLAINED IN THE HANDS OF CHAMELI DEVI AND VIJAY JINDAL AND THEREFORE JEWELLERY WORTH RS.7062837/ - WAS WELL EXPLAINED. THUS ADMITTEDLY THE JEWELLERY FOUND FROM THE ROOM OF VIJAY JINDAL AND CHAMELI JINDAL (FATHER IN LAW AND MOTHER IN LAW WA S SHORT BY RS.1276313/ - . SHHELA DEVI 603.70 801,900 REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN JEWELLERY FOUND IN SEARCH. ADDITION OF RS.129625/ - . ADDITION DELETED HOLDING THAT JEWELLERY OF HUSBAND SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. SAT PAL OLD 70 TOLAS CONVERTED INTO GRAMS 812.00 LEFT OUT OF DECLARED UNDER VDIS 316.34 GMS 812.00 316.34 1,015,000 395,425 NO ADDITIONS TOTAL JEWELLERY HELD BY THE FAMILY RESIDING AT II C/95, NEHUR NAGAR 9172.05 GMS 12,999,671 10 .1. A PERUSAL OF ALL THE ABOVE DEMONSTRATES THAT , THE REVENUE HAS IN SOME CASES CONSIDERED THE JEWELLERY FOUND IN THE POSSESSION OF ONE FAMILY M EMBERS , ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 10 AS JEWELLERY BELONGING TO THE OTHER FAMILY M EMBER. IT IS UNDISPUTED THAT ALL THESE FAMILY M EMBERS ARE RESIDING TOGETHER. UNDER THE SE CIRCUMSTANCES THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT JEWELLERY CANNOT BE SAID TO BE KEPT IN WATER TIGHT COMPARTMENTS IN JOINT HINDU FAMILIES AND THAT THE JEWELLERY OF ONE FAMILY MEMBER IS GIVEN TO THE OTHER MEMBER FOR USE ONLY AND THAT THE JEWELLERY FOUN D IN THE POSSESSION OF ONE MEMBER COULD BELONG TO ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE FAMILY, IS A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION. FURTHER THE AMOUNT OF JEWELLERY FOUND SHORT IN THE HANDS OF THE MOTHER IN LAW AND FATHER IN LAW OF THE ASSESSEE TALLIES IN VALUE, WITH THE JEWELLERY FOUND IN EXCESS IN THE ROOM OF THE ASSESSEE. REGARDING NON TALLYING OF THE ITEMS OF JEWELLERY THE EXPLANATION THAT THE ITEMS ARE CHANGED FREQUENTLY BY THE LADIES OF THE HOUSE, IS A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION. IN ANY EVENT THE ADDITIONS IN THIS CASE WAS MADE ON THE BASIS OF VALUES OF JEWELLERY AND NOT ON THE BASIS OF QUANTITATIVE TALLY. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS CASE EXPLAINED THAT RS.3 LAKHS IS THE VALUE OF 60 TOLAS AS GOLD ORNAMENTS AS ON 3.7.2002, THE DATE OF HER MARRIAGE, WHICH WAS DULY DECLARED BY HER, IN HER I.T.RETURNS. THE VALUE OF THESE 60 TOLAS, AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH IS FIXED AT RS.11,59,032/ - BY THE VALUER. DEDUCTION IS GRANTED BY THE LD.CIT(A) TO SUCH VALUE OF RS.11,59,032/ - . AS REGARDS JEWELLERY WORTH RS.13,02,245/ - THE LD.CIT(A) IGNORED THE FACT THAT AT THE TIME OF SEARCH NO STATEMENT WAS RECORDED FROM THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE THERE WAS NO OCCASION FOR HER TO STATE THAT PART OF THE JEWELLERY BELONG TO HER MOTHER IN LAW/ FATHER IN LAW OR TO SPECIFY THE ITEMS OF SUCH JEWELLERY. AT THE FIRST AVAILAB LE OPPORTUNITY THE ASSESSEE HAD STATED HER POSITION. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES NO ADVERSE INFERENCE CAN BE DRAWN AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 10 .2. KEEPING IN VIEW THE OVERALL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED ITA NO. 5279/DEL/2012 AY: 2009 - 10 SMT. RUTA S JINDAL 11 INVESTMENTS IN JEWELLERY IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, IS DEVOID OF MERIT. IN THE RESULT THE ADDITION IS DELETED AND THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED. 1 1 . IN THE RESULT THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH JUNE, 2015. SD/ - SD/ - [ I.C. SUDHIR ] [J. SUDHAKAR REDDY] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DT. T HE 17 TH J UNE, 2015 MANGA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES