What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue of unexplained jewellery to the Assessing Officer for verification. The AO is to check if the Department disputed this issue before the Settlement Commission.

The assessee's appeal concerned additions on account of unexplained jewellery. The assessee claimed to have made submissions before the Settlement Commission regarding these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the Department had disputed the unexplained jewellery issue before the Settlement Commission, and if not, whether additions were warranted.

Smt. Rachna Singh vs DCIT | ITAT Chandigarh 2018

आदेश/Order

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 21.5.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)].

In this appeal, the assessee has agitated the additions / enhancement of additions on account of unexplained jewellery found at the premises of the assessee.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee had appeared before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission in respect of the disputed additions. The assessee had made certain

ITA No. 895/Chd/2018- Smt. Rachna Singh, Chandigarh 2

submissions and the Department in its report under Rule 9 and Rule 9A had accepted the explanation given by the assessee in respect of the jewellery and did not dispute this issue before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. However, the said Rule 9 & Rule 9A report has not been

produced before us. We, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the Assessing officer to verify as to whether the issue relating to the unexplained jewellery has not been disputed by the Department before the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. If the contention of the assessee is found correct then no addition should be warranted and if the contention has not been found correct, then the Assessing officer will decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20.11.2018

Sd/- Sd/-

(अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 20.11. 2018 “आर.के.”

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

SMT. RACHNA SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CC-II, CHANDIGARH

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments