The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3515 (Del-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 69A

In case items of jewellery found during course of search at assessee's premises dt. 12-4-2016 were not matching with items as per valuation report of earlier search during 2007 addition under section 69A on account of unexplained investment in jewellery mainly on the ground that jewellery found during search of 2007 was not declared in wealth-tax returns/VDIS declation, could not be sustained as wealth of assessee was less than threshold amount of wealth liable to wealth-tax and therefore, assessee did not file wealth-tax return but valuation report of same prepared by Departmental Valuer, was one of the documents prepared under statutory Rules and Regulations and could not be brushed aside.

Income from undisclosed sources - Addition under section 69A - Jewellery found during current search not matching with jewellery found during earlier search -

AO noticed that many items of jewellery found during the course of search at assessee's premises dt. 12-4-2016 were not matching with items as per valuation report of earlier search. Accordingly, AO made addition under section 69A on account of unexplained investment in jewellery mainly on the ground that jewellery found during search of 2007 was not declared in wealth-tax returns/VDIS declation. Held: To support availability of jewellery assessee filed a copy of valuation report prepared during the course of search in calendar year 2007, which was a document of the department having evidential value akin to a copy wealth-tax return or VDIS declaration. In case of assessee, the wealth of assessee was less than threshold amount of wealth liable to wealth tax and therefore, assessee did not file wealth-tax return. So, if wealth-tax return was not filed, then jewellery found and seized during the course of the search in calendar year 2007 and valuation report of same prepared by Departmental Valuer, was one of the documents prepared under statutory Rules and Regulations and could not be brushed aside. Accordingly, addition of unexplaiend jewellery under section 69A was not warranted in case of assessee just due to minor mismatch in items of jewellery found during search and the jewellery found during earlier search.

Followed:Raj Kumar B Agrawal v. DCIT 176 DTR (Pune) Trib 273 : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 1403 (Pune-Trib)

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.

A.Y. : 2017-18



IN THE ITAT, DELHI BENCH

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT