Shri Basant Kumar Agarwalla, Kolkata V. DCIT, Central Circle - VI, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 895/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83132 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-06-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VARINDER MEHTA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Additional evidence; Valuation report

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH B , KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & HONBLE S RI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM ] ITA NO.895/KOL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) SHRI BASANT KUMAR AGARWALLA -VS- D.C.I.T., CENTRA L CIRCLE-VI, KOLKATA KOLKATA (PAN:ACMPA 9293 K) FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI RAVI TULSIYAN, FCA FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI VARINDER MEHTA, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 10.09.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10. 09.2014. ORDER PER SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST ORDER OF LD. C.I.T.(A)- CENTRAL-I, KOLKATA DATED 04.04.2011 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED IN THIS APPEAL REA D AS UNDER :- 1. THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE ARBITRARY, UNREASONED, ERRONEOUS, INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.2,73,413/- BY WAY OF FINDING OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY DURING SEARCH, ON THE BASIS OF MINOR VARI ATIONS BETWEEN THE VALUATION REPORTS OF THE AUTHORISED VALUER AND THE DEPARTMENTAL VALUE R, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT ALMOST IDENTICAL ITEMS FIGURED IN BOTH THE VAL UATION REPORTS. 3. WITHOUT ANY PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND, ON TH E FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING TH E ADDITION OF RS.2,73,413/- BY WAY OF FINDING OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY DURING SEA RCH BY WRONGLY DISREGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT THAT HE WAS NOT AT ALL THE OWNER OF THE JEWELLERY UNDER CONSIDERATION. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND, ALTER, MODI FY, SUBSTITUTE , ADD TO, ABRIDGE AND/OR RESCIND ANY OR ALL OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS. 3. IN THIS CASE SEARCH OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED AT THE RESIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. JEWELLERY VALUED AT RS.2,37,30,020/- WAS FOUND. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF THE SAID JEWELLERY FOUND. EXAMINI NG THE RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT ITA NO.895/K/2011 SHRI BASAN T KUMAR AGARWALLA A.YR.2008-09 2 OF THE ASSESSEE AO HELD THAT ADDITION WILL BE MADE FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED HEREIN :- SL.NO. ITEM NO.AS PER ANNE.- BKA DESCRIPTION REASON FOR HELD UNEXPLAINED VALUE 1. 4 1 PC.TIKLY SET WITH DIAMOND 18 CT. AS PER DVR, 3.5 CT.DIAMOND BUT AS PER AVR ONLY 1.35 CT.DIAMOND 64,500 2. 108 1 PC NECKLACE 1 PC. BRACELATE WITH DIAMOND & IMITATION STONE AS PER DVR,S 3 CT.DIAMOND BUT AS PER AVR ONLY 0.5 CT.DIAMOND 58,913 3. 114 1 PC.NECKLACE SET WITH DIAMOND AS PER DVR, 9 CT. DIAMOND BUT AS PER AVR 2.5 CT.DIAMOND 1,50,000 TOTAL: 2,73,413 4. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THA T RESIDENTIAL PREMISES AT DHANBAD DID NOT BELONG TO THE ASSESSEE SOLELY. THE PREMISES WAS SHARED BY SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD AGARWALLA, SHRI BINOD KUMAR AGARWALL A AND THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS. THE ASSESEE EXPLAINED THAT TH E ITEMS MENTIONED BY THE AO DO NOT BELONG TO HIM AND NO UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT SHO ULD BE ADDED IN RESPECT OF THE JEWELLERY. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT A CERTIFICATE FROM THE CONCERNED PERSON CLAIMING THE OWNERSHIP OF THE JEWELLERY WAS NOT FILED. HENCE THE LD. CIT(A) HELD THAT AO HAS RIGHTLY ADDED THE UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY IN THE HAND S OF THE ASSESSEE. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL B EFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND CAREFULLY PER USED THE RECORDS. THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESEE HAS SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL EVI DENCES AND PRAYED FOR ADMISSION OF THE SAME. THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES INCLUDE CONFIRMATION OF THE CONCERNED PERSON TO WHOM THE SA ID JEWELLERY BELONGED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY AGREED THAT THIS EV IDENCE WAS NOT PRODUCED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HENCE HE PRAYED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. TO EXAMINE THE CERTIFICATES PRODUCED FOR THE FI RST TIME. ITA NO.895/K/2011 SHRI BASAN T KUMAR AGARWALLA A.YR.2008-09 3 6. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, DID NOT OBJECT TO THE ABOVE PROPOSITION. 7. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION WE ARE INCLINED TO RE MIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO. AO IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND DECIDE THE ISSUE AS PER LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE STANDS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10.09.2014. SD/- SD/- [ MAHAVIR SINGH ] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 10.09.2014. R.G.(.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI BASANT KUMAR AGARWALLA, 2C, MANGALAM APARTMENT , 35, AHIRIPUKUR ROAD, KOLKATA-700019. 2 D.C.I.T., CENTRAL CIRCLE-VI, KOLKATA. 3 . CIT(A)-CENTRAL-I, KOLKATA. 4. CIT - KOLKATA. 5. CIT-DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES