Addition for excess Gold – ITAT extends benefit of CBDT Instruction to mother of married female assessee

Muppavarapu Kavitha Vs ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam)

It was contended that mother of the assessee is staying with her daughter, who is the only daughter and hence the benefit of CBDT Instruction No. 1916 should also be extended to the mother of the assessee.

Admitted facts are that the gold jewellery belonging to family members was seized to the extent of 1628.025 grams and there is no dispute on the fact that as per the CBDT Instruction No.1916, dated 11/5/1994 that in a case of a person who is not assessed to wealth tax, gold jewellery and ornaments to the extent of 500 grams per a married lady, 250 grams per an unmarried lady and 100 grams per male member of the family should not be seized. As per the list mentioned in para 4 of the assessment order it is noted that the AO has erred in disallowing the excess gold of 284.600 grams belonging to the mother of the assessee who is staying with the assessee being the only daughter, and considered as belonging to the family members of the assessee. In these peculiar circumstances, we find merit in the argument of the Ld. AR and we are of the considered view that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) needs to be quashed and allow the appeal of the assessee.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-12, Hyderabad [Ld. CIT(A)] in appeal No.10590/2019-20, dated 24/01/2022 arising out of the order passed U/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act” ] for the AY 2018-19.

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