Case Law Details
Sharad Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
It is seen from the record that the lower authorities have been disputing the factum of Will. It is also undisputed fact that in the Will there is no specific mention relating to weight and description of such jewellery which was being bequeathed by the testator. However, it also cannot be inferred that by this Will no jewellery was bequeathed. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts I am of the considered view that the AO should have also given benefit of CBDT Instruction with regard to the jewellery of grand-mother. I, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to grant set off of 500 gms., of jewellery as per CBDT Instruction relating to the grand-mother of the assessee in addition to the relief given by the learned CIT(Appeals). The Assessing Officer would, accordingly, re-compute the addition, in the light of aforesaid direction. The grounds raised in this appeal are partly allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi, dated 13.12.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2019-20. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CTT (Appeals) has erred in not accounting for the jewellery inherited by the appellant from his late grandmother and has excluded the same from the permissible limit.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
