Addition towards unexplained jewellery unsustainable as ownership belongs to various people

Ashok Kumar Tyagi Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

ITAT Delhi held that addition towards unexplained jewellery unsustainable as panchnama clearly mentions the fact that ownership of jewellery belongs to various people.

Facts- The appellant contested that Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the learned Assessing officer of Rs.7,03,200/- under the head unexplained cash and addition of Rs.28,44,470/- under the head unexplained jewellery without going through the facts of the case that cash and jewellery does not belong to the appellant.

Conclusion- We find from the record that no statement of the assessee with regard to the cash found has been recorded u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and statement recorded of the father of the assessee Sh. Jaiveer Tyagi on day of search itself revealed that the amount pertains Sh. Jaiveer Tyagi and other family members. Hence, keeping in view, the entire facts and circumstances, the location of the cash found, the statement of Sh. Jaiveer Tyagi recorded on the date of search, we hold that no addition is called for on account of cash in the hands of the assessee.

We find that the jewellery has been separately valued in different names of the family members namely, Ms. Bindu Tyagi, Ms. Indu Tyagi and Ms. Rajni The panchnama drawn has also clearly mentioned the fact of ownership of the jewelley with various people. Hence, the addition ought not to have been made in the hands of the assessee and hence, the same is ordered to be deleted.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.