Instances of seizure of jewellery of small quantity in
course of operations under section 132 have come to the notice of the Board.
The question of a common approach to situations where search parties come
across items ofjewellery, has been examined by the Board and following
guidelines are issued for strict compliance.
(i) In the case of a
wealth-tax assessee, gold jewellery and ornaments found in
excess of the gross weight declared in the wealth-tax return only need be
seized.
(ii) In the case of a person not
assessed to wealth-tax gold jewellery and ornaments to the extent of
500 gms. permarried lady, 250 gms. per unmarried lady
and 100 gms per male member of the family need not be seized.
(iii) The authorised officer may, having regard
to the status of the family, and the custom and practices of the community to
which the family belongs and other circumstances of the case, decide to exclude
a larger quantity of jewellery and ornaments from seizure. This
should be reported to the Director of Income-tax/Commissioner authorising the
search at the time of furnishing the search report.
(iv) In all cases, a detailed inventory
of the jewellery and ornaments found must be prepared to be used for
assessment purposes.
These guidelines may please be brought to the notice of the
officers in your region.
Instruction : No. 1916, dated 11-5-1994.
JUDICIAL ANALYSIS
EXPLAINED IN - The above instructions are explained in Harakchand N. Jain v. Asstt. CIT [1998] 61 TTJ (Mum.) 223, with the following observations :
“(ii) A perusal of the above circular shows that in case of person not assessed to wealth-tax gold jewellery and ornaments to the extent of 500 gms.per married lady, 250 gms. per unmarried lady and 100 gms. per male member of the family need not be seized. It further provides that having regard to the status of the family and custom and practice of the community to which the family belongs, the officer may exclude a large quantity of jewellery and ornaments and seizure. In the present case, there are four male members in the family, the assessee and his three sons. Similarly, there are two married ladies and one unmarried lady. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the jewellery of the assessee and his wife was low and was received by various occasions, like marriage delivery, birth, etc. and the jewellery belonged to the children was also received in similar occasions. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative argued that the assessee has not provided any evidence to explain the source of the investment in the jewellery.
(iii) On careful consideration of the rival submission we find that the assessee has not placed on record any evidence to prove that the jewellery has been received as gift by him by producing the GT return or any other evidence. However, we are conscious of the fact that in Indian society everyone receives gifts at the time of marriage and other occasions. Therefore, keeping in view the number of family members we are of the view that further rebate of 500 gms. out of the entire jewellery may be treated as explained. The balance 426 gms. of jewellery may be treated as addition under section 69A of the Income-tax Act.”
No comments:
Post a Comment