ACIT, New Delhi v. Mrs. Jyoti Jaggi, New Delhi

ITSSA 9/DEL/2011 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 11-10-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 920116 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAFPJ2190R
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITSSA 9/DEL/2011
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, New Delhi
Respondent Mrs. Jyoti Jaggi, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 11-10-2013
Date Of Final Hearing 23-07-2013
Next Hearing Date 23-07-2013
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 14-03-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA IT(SS)A NO. 9/DEL/2011 BLOCK PERIOD: 1-4-1990 TO 7-10-2000 ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-25 VS. MRS. JYOTI JAGGI NEW DELHI. F-1/6 MODEL TOWN DELHI. PAN: AAFPJ 2190 R ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : SHRI D.K. MISHRA DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.J. KHANNA CA O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI J.M : THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST CIT(A)S ORDER D ATED 14-12-2010 RELATING TO BLOCK PERIOD 1-4-1990 TO 17-10-2000.FOL LOWING GROUNDS ARE RAISED: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AN D FACTS. 2. IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 4 93 642/- EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT IN JEWELLERY SEIZED DURING SEARCH. 3. IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 25 00 000/- TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS IN THE FOREIGN BANK AC COUNT WITHOUT GIVING ANY REASONS FOR RELIEF AND WITHOUT A LLOWING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2 4. IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2 8 0 000/- TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED FOREIGN TOUR EXPENSES WITHOUT A NY REASONS FOR RELIEF AND WITHOUT ALLOWING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2 8 6 950/- TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN SHARES WHEREAS TH E ASSESSEE NEITHER EXPLAINED THE SOURCE NOR FILED ANY RECONCIL IATION WITH REFERENCE TO SHARES DISCLOSED IN WEALTH TAX RETURN. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD ALTER OR AMEN D ANY/ ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE C OURSE OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. GROUND NOS. 1 AND 6 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND RE QUIRE NO ADJUDICATION. 3. BRIEF FACTS ARE: CONSEQUENT TO SEARCH & SEIZURE OPERATION IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 17-10-2000 THE ASSESSME NT FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 1-4-1990 TO 17-10-2000 AT RS. 36 41 580/-. ITAT VID E ORDER DATED 13-12- 2007 SET ASIDE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSES SING OFFICER WITH SPECIFIC DIRECTION OF VERIFICATION AND GRANT OF FRESH OPPORT UNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. VIDE ORDER DATED 29-12-2008 THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFRAM ED THE ASSESSMENT ON THE SAME UNDISCLOSED INCOME I.E. 36 41 580/- AFTER HEA RING THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL. THE CIT (A) ON THE AFOREMENTIONED GROUNDS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASS ESSEE BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS. 3 GROUND NO. 2 : IT IS SEEN FROM THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE JEWELLERY WEIGHING 488.84 GMS WAS OWNED BY SHRI PAWAN JAGGI H USBAND OF THE APPELLANT AND AS SUCH SHALL BE CONSIDERED IN HIS HA NDS ONLY. AS FAR AS QUESTION OF OWNERSHIP OF 2269.01 IS CONCE RNED THE SAME IS OWNED AND STANDS DULY EXPLAINED BY THE APPELLANT BE FORE MY PREDECESSOR AND THE ITAT. THE JEWELLERY LISTED AT I TEM NO. (A) WEIGHING 808.25 GMS (C) 251.06 GMS AND (D) 845 GMS STANDS FULLY EXPLAINED BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. AS FAR AS JEWELL ERY AGGREGATING 364.700 GMS LISTED AT SL. NO. (B) AND (E) ARE CONCE RNED I FEEL THAT THE APPELLANT MUST HAVE RECEIVED SOME JEWELLERY AT THE BIRTH OF HER SON ON 23.8.1992 AND VARIOUS OTHER OCCASIONS LIKE MARRIAGE ANNIVERSARY AND BIRTHDAY ETC. I ESTIMATE THE RECEIPT OF SUCH JEWELL ERY AT 250 GMS. I HEREBY DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMPUTE THE VALUE OF UNEXPLAINED JEWELLERY AT 114 GMS AND RECOMPUTED THE ADDITION ACCORDINGLY ON THE PREVAILING JEWELLERY RATE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. THUS THE APPEAL ON THIS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLOWED. GROUND NO. 3 : THE SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST ADDITION OF RS. 25 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF FOREIGN BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF THE APPELLANT WITH JOINTLY WITH HER HUSBAND SHRI PAWAN JAGGI. IT IS A FACT ON RECORD THAT THE HUSBAND OF THE APPELLANT IS THE PRIMARY HOLDER OF THE ACCOUNT AND THE APPELLANT IS ONLY JOINT HOLDER OF THE SAID ACCO UNT. I FIND FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31-12-2008 IN THE NAME OF TH E HUSBAND OF THE APPELLANT THAT AN ADDITION OF RS. 50 LACS WAS ALSO MADE IN HIS HANDS. SINCE THE ADDITION WAS MADE IN THE HAND OF THE APPE LLANTS HUSBAND WHO IS THE BENEFICIAL AND PRIMARY HOLDER OF THE ACC OUNT I SEE NO JUSTIFICATION OF MAKING ANY SEPARATE ADDITION IN TH E HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. THE SAID ADDITION OF RS. 25 LACS ON THIS ACCOUNT IS DELETED. GROUND NO. 4 : THE THIRD GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 80 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE APPELLANT ON F OREIGN TOUR. IT IS SEEN FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED IN THE HANDS OF SHRI PAWAN JAGGI THAT AN ADDITION OF RS. 452000/- WAS MADE IN HIS HANDS. SINCE 4 THE HUSBAND OF THE APPELLANT HAD OWNED AND EXPLAINE D THE ENTIRE EXPENDITURE ON FOREIGN TRAVEL BY HIM AND THE APPELL ANT I SEE NO JUSTIFICATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 2 80 000/- IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT ESPECIALLY WHEN AN ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE HA NDS OF SHRI PAWAN JAGGI HUSBAND OF THE APPELLANT. IN RESULT THE SAID ADDITION OF RS. 2 80 000/- IS DELETED. GROUND NO. 5 : THE FOURTH GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 3 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN EQUITY SHARES/ DEBENTURES. IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE SEIZED DOCUMENT THAT THE APPELLAN T OWNED THE UNDER NOTED SHARES ON THE DATE OF SEARCH:- NAME OF THE SHARES QTY. RATE TOTAL ASEAN BROWN 14 INCLUDED IN WEALTH TAX RETURN ICICI 80 INCLUDED IN WEALTH TAX RETURN MODI ALKALIES 350 19 6650 NOVA STEEL 200 12 2400 REGENCY IND 200 INCLUDED IN WEALTH TAX RETURN TULIP FINANCE 1000 4 4000 13 050 SHE HAD EXPLAINED THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT SHARES OF THE AGGREGATE VALUE OF RS. 13 050/- WERE NOT FINDING PL ACE IN HER WEALTH TAX RETURN AND AS SUCH I HOLD THAT THE SAID INVESTMENT IN EQUITY SHARES IS UNEXPLAINED TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 3 050/-. THE BALANCE ADDITION OF RS. 2 86 950/- IS DELETED IN AP PEAL. AGGRIEVED THE REVENUE IS BEFORE US. 3. LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY ARGUES T HAT JEWELLERY WEIGHING 488.84 GMS HAS BEEN OWNED AND ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI PAWAN JAGGI. THE ASSES SEE IS A MARRIED LADY AND CIT(A) HAS ESTIMATED 250 GMS OF JEWELLERY AS HE R STRIDHAN WHICH IS IN 5 CONSONANCE WITH CBDT CIRCULARS IN THIS BEHALF. THER EFORE THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 4.1. APROPOS SECOND GROUND AN AMOUNT OF RS. 50 LA CS STOOD IN A JOINT BANK ACCOUNT WITH HER HUSBAND WHO IS THE PRIMARY HO LDER OF THE ACCOUNT. THE ACCOUNT HAS BEEN OWNED BY THE HUSBAND AND AN AD DITION OF RS. 50 LACS HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF HER HUSBAND. REL YING ON THE FACT THE HUSBAND BEING THE PRIMARY HOLDER OF THE ACCOUNT THE ADDITION HAS BEEN RETAINED IN HIS HANDS AND DELETED IN THE HANDS OF T HE ASSESSEE BEING A SECOND WHO IS A JOINT HOLDER. THUS THE ADDITION OF RS. 50 LACS INCLUDING THE IMPUGNED RS. 25 LACS STANDS TAXED IN THE HANDS OF T HE HUSBAND. THEREFORE CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 4.2. APROPOS FOURTH GROUND THE ENTIRE FOREIGN TRAV EL EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN OWNED AND EXPLAINED BY THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE AND AN ADDITION OF RS. 4 52 000/- HAS BEEN MADE IN HIS HANDS. THEREFORE T HERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION OF A SEPARATE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF EH ASSESSEE. TH E ORDER OF CIT(A) IS RELIED ON. 4.3. APROPOS FIFTH GROUND THE ASSESSEE DEMONSTRATED THAT SHARES AS MENTIONED ABOVE ARE INCLUDED IN THE WEALTH-TAX RETU RNS WHICH HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED BY THE CIT(A) FROM UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND BALANCE ADDITION FOR SHARES HAS BEEN RETAINED WHICH WERE NOT FOUND IN RE TURN. 5. WE HAVE HERD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) GIVING RELIEF BY 6 ESTIMATING 250 GMS OF GOLD ORNAMENTS AS STRIDHAN OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS IN CONSONANCE WITH BOARDS CIRCULARS. 5.1. APROPOS THE ISSUE OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF FO REIGN BANK ACCOUNT IT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED THAT THE FULL AMOUNT OF RS. 5 0 LACS STANDS ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE HUSBAND. THEREFORE CIT(A) HAS RIG HTLY DELETED THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THIS COUNT. 5.2. APROPOS THE FOREIGN TOUR EXPENSES SINCE THE E NTIRE UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE OF RS. 4 52 000/- HAS BEEN ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEES HUSBAND THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO RETAIN ANY AD DITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THIS ADDIT ION. WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THIS COUNT. 5.3. APROPOS LAST GROUND CIT(A) HAS WORKED OUT UND ISCLOSED SHARES AFTER VERIFYING THE WEALTH TAX RECORD OF THE ASSESSEE AN D HAS EXCLUDED THOSE SHARES. WE SEE NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11-10-2013. SD/- SD/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) ( R.P. TOLANI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11-10-2013. MP COPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR