DCIT Vs Smt. Ashu Ashok (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi Deletes Income Addition Because Section 44AD Did Not Require Detailed Expense Proof; Jewellery Addition Removed as Prior Disclosure Before Settlement Commission Covered Search Findings; No Estimated Expense Disallowance Allowed Under Section 44AD; ITAT Delhi Upholds Deletion of Jewellery Addition Due to Earlier Settlement Disclosure.
In DCIT Vs Smt. Ashu Ashok, the ITAT Delhi dismissed the Revenue’s appeal and upheld the order of the CIT(A) deleting additions made towards undisclosed income and unexplained jewellery for Assessment Year 2022-23.
The Revenue challenged the deletion of two additions: Rs.18,15,787/- made on account of undisclosed income and Rs.73,84,020/- added as unexplained investment in jewellery. According to the Revenue, the assessee had failed to produce documentary evidence regarding expenditure incurred for earning income and proof relating to ownership and source of jewellery found during search proceedings.
The case arose from a search and seizure operation conducted under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act on 22.10.2016 at various premises of the “Sukhija Group” in Delhi, a group engaged in running restaurants and bars. During the search, incriminating documents and jewellery were found. The assessee filed her return of income declaring total income of Rs.10,35,680/-. Notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) along with questionnaires were issued during assessment proceedings, and the authorised representative furnished details from time to time.
