AJAY NAVINCHANDRA SHAH, MUMBAI v. ITO 24(1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 1052/MUM/2010 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 105219914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAHPS7182C
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1052/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant AJAY NAVINCHANDRA SHAH, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 24(1)(3), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 29-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 23-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 23-03-2011
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 09-02-2010
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. V. EASWAR PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJEN DRA SINGH(AM) ITA NO.1052/M/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 MR. AJAY NAVINCHANDRA SHAH THE ITO 24(1)(3) C-1 3 5 TH FLOOR 601/602 ADARSH HARMONY OFF MARVE ROAD PRATYAKSHKA R BHAVAN ADARSH VIHAR COMPLEX MALAD (W) BANDRA (E) MUMBA I 400 051. MUMBAI 400 049. PAN : AAHPS7182C APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : MR. MAYUR SHAH REVENUE BY : MR. A.K.NAYAK O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 30.12.2009 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-0 6. THE ONLY DISPUTE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS.3 01 780 /- AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF JEWELLERY. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E AO ON ACCOUNT OF EXAMINATION OF WEALTH TAX RETURNS NOTED THAT THE AS SESSEE HAD SHOWN JEWELLERY OF RS.3 01 780/- IN THE NAME OF MINOR CHILD WHICH H AD BEEN ADDED TO HIS NET WEALTH. BASED ON THE SAID INFORMATION THE AO REOPEN ED THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SEC TION 148 ON 13.2.2008. THE ASSESSEE DURING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS EX PLAINED THAT THE MINOR 2 DAUGHTER OF THE ASSESSEE HAD INHERITED THE JEWELLER Y FROM HER GREAT GRANDMOTHER LATE SMT. SHANTABEN D.SHAH WHO HAD EXPI RED ON 18.1.2001. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE LAST WISHES OF S MT. SHANTABEN D.SHAH THE JEWELLERY WAS TO PASS TO THE YOUNGEST GREAT GRANT C HILD SURVIVING HER ON 31.3.2005. THE PURPOSE OF SUCH WISH WAS THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE ANY SONS IN CASE ANY SONS WERE TO BE BORN IN THE F AMILY THE SONS SHOULD INHERIT THE JEWELLERY. HOWEVER ASSESSEE AS ON 31.3. 2005 HAD ONLY TWO DAUGHTERS AND THE YOUNGEST ONE THEREFORE INHERITED THE JEWELLERY. THE AO HOWEVER NOTED THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NO T SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE THERE WAS NO WILL LEFT BY THE GREAT GRAND MOTHER AND THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT SHE OWNED THE JEWELLERY IN Q UESTION. SHE HAD NOT FILED ANY RETURN OF INCOME OR WEALTH TAX RETURN. AO THERE FORE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION REGARDING THE SOURCE OF JEWELLERY AND M ADE ADDITION OF RS.3 01 780/- AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE . 2.1 IN APPEAL THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE CIT(A) THAT THE GREAT GRAND MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE OWNED ONE HOUSE PROPERTY AND THE JEWELLERY IN QUESTION AND SHE WAS NOT ASSESSED TO TAX AS THE INC OME WAS NOT TAXABLE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SHRI NAVINCHANDRA B.SHAH TH E ELDER SON HAD DEVOTED HIS EARLIER YEARS IN LIFE FOR SETTLING HIS FOUR BRO THERS AND SISTERS AND THEREFORE AS A MARK OF APPRECIATION OF SHRI NAVINCHANDRA B.SHAH S SELFLESS EFFORTS IN SETTLING THE FAMILY MEMBERS THE JEWELLERY IN QUESTION HAD B EEN GIVEN TO THE YOUNGEST CHILD TO BE BORNE TO THE GRANDSON SHRI AJAY N. SHA H. AS REGARDS THE HOUSE PROPERTY OWNED BY HIS GREAT GRAND MOTHER THE SAME HAD BEEN GIVEN TO HER FOUR SONS IN EQUAL SHARE. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY REQUES TED THAT THE SOURCE OF ACQUISITION OF JEWELLERY SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. CIT(A) HOWEVER NOTED THAT THE GREAT GRAND MOTHER HAD EXPIRED IN 2001 BUT THE JEWE LLERY WAS DISCLOSED ONLY IN 3 THE WEALTH TAX RETURN FOR A.Y.2005-06. HE THEREFORE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION GIVEN AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE B Y THE AO AGGRIEVED BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL . 3. BEFORE US THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE REITER ATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTE D THAT THE GROSS WEIGHT OF THE JEWELLERY RECEIVED BY THE MINOR DAUGHTER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS 558.85 GRAM WHICH WAS THE ONLY JEWELLERY OWNED BY LATE SMT SHAN TABEN B.SHAH. HE ALSO FILED AFFIDAVITS FROM ALL THE LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE S MT. SHANTABEN B.SHAH AS AN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED A T PAGES 5 TO 16 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IN THE AFFIDAVITS ALL THE LEGAL HEIRS H AVE AFFIRMED THAT LATE SMT. SHANTABEN B.SHAH HAD ORALLY EXPRESSED HER DESIRE TH AT HER PERSONAL JEWELLERY IN THE FORM OF GOLD ORNAMENTS WEIGHING 558.85 GRAM WOULD PASS ON TO HER YOUNGER CHILD BORN TO HER GRANDSON AJAY M.SHAH BY 3 1.5.2005. IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES SHOULD BE A DMITTED. THE LEARNED DR ON THE OTHER HAND PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF AUT HORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS AND CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS CAREFULLY. THE DISPUTE IS REGARDING ADDITION OF RS. 3 01 780/- BEING THE VALUE OF THE JEWELLERY WEIGHING 558.85 GRAMS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN INHERITED BY THE MINOR DAUGHTER OF THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS GREAT GRAND MOTHER AS PER HER ORAL WISHES. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEE N ACCEPTED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS THE GREAT GRAND MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX OR WEALTH TAX AND THE SOURCE OF THE J EWELLERY WAS THUS NOT EXPLAINED. THE ASSESSEE HAS HOWEVER FILED ADDITIONA L EVIDENCES IN THE FORM OF AFFIDAVIT FROM ALL THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE GREAT GRA ND MOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE AFFIRMING THAT AS PER HER WISHES THE JEWELLERY WAS TO PASS ON TO THE YOUNGEST 4 CHILD TO BE BORN TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE CONSIDERE D THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. IT IS CU STOMARY IN THE INDIAN SOCIETY FOR LADIES TO OWN JEWELLERY AND THEREFORE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS GRAND MOTHER OWNED JEWELLERY AND PASSED ON THE SAME TO HIS MINOR DAUGHTER CANNOT BE REJECTED OUTRIGHT. THE AFFIDAVITS FILED B Y ALL THE LEGAL HEIRS OF HIS GREAT GRAND MOTHER ARE IMPORTANT PIECES OF EVIDENCE FOR D ECIDING THE ISSUE. WE THEREFORE ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FOR SUBSTAN TIAL CAUSE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. IN OUR VIEW THE ISSUE REQUIRES FRESH EX AMINATION AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE AFFIDAVITS. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO FOR PASSING A FRESH OR DER AFTER NECESSARY EXAMINATION IN THE LIGHT OF OBSERVATIONS MADE ABOVE AND AFTER ALLOWING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 29.03.201 1. SD/- SD/- ( R. V. EASWAR ) (RAJENDR A SINGH) PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 29.03.2011 AT :MUMBAI COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) MUMBAI CONCERNED 4. THE CIT MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED 5. THE DR G BENCH ITAT MUMBAI // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI ALK 5