Nitesh Munje ITA No. 65/Ind/2015 IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 65/Ind/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Nitesh Munje Indore PAN ADTPN 0657Q :: Appellant Vs ACIT 2(1) Indore :: Respondent Appellant by Shri C.P. Rawka Respondent by Shri Lalchand 21.9.2016 Date of hearing 29.09.2016 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JM This appeal has been filed by assessee against order of learned CIT(A)-I, Indore, dated 14.10.2014. 1 Nitesh Munje ITA No. 65/Ind/2015 2. At time of hearing only ground pressed by learned counsel for assessee is ground no. 2 to effect that learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts of case and made addition of Rs.200000/- towards told, silver jewellery found released at time of search. addition made by Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) is totally wrong and illegal on facts of case. 3. Briefly stated facts of case are that during course of search, jewellery was found and Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.12,77,409/- towards gold and silver ornaments found during search. learned counsel for assessee submitted that while making this addition, Assessing Officer has ignored statement recorded during search regarding source of such jewellery and also ignored Board Circular. During course of search, gold ornaments weighing 639.50 gms valued at Rs.1069801/- and silver articles of 6.325 gms 2 Nitesh Munje ITA No. 65/Ind/2015 valued at Rs. 2,07,248/- were found from residence of assessee at 27/1, Silver Park, Dr. Roshan Singh Bhandari Marg, Indore. gold jewellery pertained to three ladies, assessee s mother, his wife and brother s wife who acquired same during marriage which represent Stridhan. Considering facts of case, learned CIT(A) reduced addition to Rs. 2,00,000/- by observing as under :- 7. Ground no. 4 of appeal is against addition of Rs. 12,77,049/- towards gold and silver ornaments found and released during search. It is stated by appellant that A.O. while making such addition ignored various statements recorded during search on explanation regarding source of such jewellery and also ignored Board Circular. During search gold ornaments weighing 639.50 gms valued at Rs.10,69,801/- and silver articles of 6.325 kg valued at Rs.2,07,248/- were found. gold jewellery was explained as pertaining to 3 ladies, appellant s mother, his wife and his brother s wife, mainly acquired during their marriage and represents their stridhan. 3 Nitesh Munje ITA No. 65/Ind/2015 However, appellant admitted in his statement that few new gold ornaments were purchased and silver coins were purchased. Considering statement of appellant given during search as also fact that holding of such jewellery in hands of three ladies is not much and it is customary to receive gift of silver articles on various occasions, I hold that confirming addition of Rs.1.50 lacs for gold jewellery and Rs.50,000/- for silver coins/articles i.e. total of Rs.2.00 lacs will meet end of justice. As result out of addition of Rs.12,77,049/- only amount of Rs.2,00,000/- is confirmed and appellant gets relief of Rs.10,77,049/-. Ground no. 4 of appeal is partly allowed. 4. During course of hearing, learned counsel for assessee submitted that as per Circular No. 1916 dated 11.05.1994 issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes, possession of 500 gms of jewellery by each married lady is permissible. Gold jewellery of 639.50 gms and silver of 6.325 gms were found which cannot be treated to be unexplained as per above Circular. 4 Nitesh Munje ITA No. 65/Ind/2015 5. On other hand, learned DR supported order of learned CIT(A). 6. We have heard both sides. We find that above Circular requires non-seizure of jewellery to extent of 500 gms for married lady, 250 gms for unmarried lady and 100 grms for male to be extended to assessment proceedings and same to be treated as explained income. Since there are three lady members in family, as per above CBDT Circular, possession of seized jewellery cannot be questioned. We, therefore, delete addition of Rs.2,00,000/- sustained by learned CIT(A). 5. In result, appeal of assessee stands partly allowed. order has been pronounced in open Court on 29 September, 2016. Sd/- sd/- (O.P.Meena) (D.T.Garasia) Accountant Member Judicial Member /Dated : 29 September, 2016. Dn/ 5 Nitesh Munje v. ACIT 2(1), Indore