Smt. Manjula Agarwal , Kanpur V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur

ITA 74/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 7423714 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 04-06-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.74/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08 SMT. MANJULA AGARWAL 51/46, NAYAGANJ KAN P UR V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE II KAN P UR PAN:AANPA8494R ( A PP ELLANT ) ( RES P ONDENT ) APPELLANT BY: SHRI. RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE RES P ONDENT B Y : SHRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR, CIT ( DR ) DATE OF HEARING: 06.06.2013 DATE OF PRONOU NCEMENT: 07.08.2013 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY TH E ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON VARIOUS GR OUNDS, BUT THEY ALL RELA TE TO THE ADDITION OF ` 32,192 MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVE STMENT IN JEWELLERY UNDER SECTION 69 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. IN THIS REGARD, IT IS NOTICED TH AT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OPERATION, GOLD JEWELLERY WEI GHING 1121 GMS. WAS FOUND FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, IT WAS STATED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE IMPUGNED JE WELLERY BELONGED TO HER. HOWEVER, THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN JEWELLERY COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH . BUT, BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THE :-2-: ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PART OF THE JE WELLERY WHICH WERE DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER VDIS, 1997. THE VALUATION CERTIFICATE OF THE APPROVED VALUER AS WELL AS THE CERT IFICATE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 68(2) OF VDIS, 1997 DATED 29.10.1997 WA S PRODUCED BY THE AS SESSEE. AS PER THE CERTIFICATE, THE QUANTUM OF JEWELLERY DISCLOSED WA S 10671.900 GMS. IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE JE WELLERY WEIGHING 7077.800 GMS. WAS SOLD ON 27.10.1997 AND 501 GM S. WAS SOLD ON 30.7.1998 LEAVING BALANCE JEWELLERY WITH THE ASSESSEE AT 1093.100 GMS. THE TRIBUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE F ILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE ISSUE WAS RE- EXAMINED BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER WHO FINALLY MADE ADDITION OF ` 32,192 AFTER TREATING THE JEWELLERY AT 27.900 GMS. AS UNEXPLAINED. 3. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT OUT OF THE ENTIRE JEWELLERY, 1093.100 GMS. WAS OUT OF JEWELLERY DECLARED UNDER VDIS, 1997 AND THE BALANCE JEWELLERY OF 27.900 GMS. WAS ACCUMULATED OVER A PERIOD OF 9 YEARS FROM THE PERSONAL SAVINGS OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS AR GUMENT WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND HE CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US A ND REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SU BMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE DECLARATION UNDER VDIS , 1997 ON 27.10.1997 AND SEAR CH WAS CONDUCTED ON 17.10.2006. THEREFORE, OV ER A PERIOD OF 9 YEARS THE JEWELLERY WEIGHING 27.900 GMS. WERE ACCUMULATED ON PURCH ASE FROM THE PERS ONAL SAVINGS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS GENE RAL PRACTICE IN THE SOCI ETY THAT LADIES USE TO PURCHASE SMALL JEWELLERY OUT OF THEIR PERSONAL SAVINGS. BUT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES DID NOT GIVE ANY CREDIT TO THE GENERAL PRACTICE PREVAILING IN THE SOCIETY. 5. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND , HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). :-3-: 6. HAVING GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDER ATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM A CAREFUL PERUSA L OF RECORD, WE FIND TH AT THE DECLARATION UNDER VDIS, 1997 WAS MADE ON 27.10.1997 IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED JEWELLERY WEIGHING 10671.900 GMS. OUT OF WHICH PART OF JEWELLERY WAS SOLD AND 1093.100 GMS. WERE LEFT WITH THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH 1121 GMS. JEWELLERY WAS FOUN D OUT OF WHICH 1093.100 GMS. WAS PART OF JEWELLERY DECLARED UNDER VDIS 1997. THE DISPUTE WAS RAISED WITH REGARD TO THE BALANCE JEWELLERY OF 27.900 GMS. FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT IT WAS ACCUMULATED OVER A PERIOD OF 9 YE ARS ON ITS PURCHASE FROM THE PERSONAL SAVINGS OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE CONTENTI ON OF THE ASSESSEE THAT LADIES GENERALLY PURCHASE SMAL L JEWELLERIES OUT OF THEIR PERSONAL SAVINGS, CANNOT BE REJECTED. WE ARE, ACCORDINGLY, OF THE VIEW THAT A PRAGMATIC APPROACH BE ADOPTED WHILE DEAL ING WITH THIS TYPE OF ISSUE. THE JEWELLERY WEIGHING 27.900 GMS. COULD BE ACCUMULATED OVER A PERIOD OF 9 YEARS ON ITS PURCHASE FROM THE PERS ONAL SAVINGS OF TH E ASSESSEE. WE ACCORDINGLY FIND NO ME RIT IN THE ADDITION AND DELETE THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN TH E OPEN COURT ON 7.8.2013. SD/- SD/- [PRAMOD KUMAR] [S UNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:7.8.2013 JJ:0207 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR