This case involves a tax dispute for the assessment year 2020-21, where the DCIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi, filed an appeal against Jyotsna Suri, New Delhi. The case was filed on December 2, 2022, and the final order was pronounced on September 6, 2023. The dispute primarily revolves around allegations of unexplained investment in two watches, unexplained jewellery, and unexplained foreign currency found during a search and seizure operation.
In the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench “C” New Delhi, the case was heard before Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member, and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member.
The case number for the assessment year 2020-21 is ITA 2840/DEL/2022. The DCIT, Central Circle-17, New Delhi, is the appellant, and Jyotsna Suri, residing at N-119, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi, 110017, is the respondent.
The assessee was represented by Shri U.N. Marwah, CA, and Shri Parveen Goel, Adv. The department was represented by Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT(DR).
The date of hearing was August 23, 2023, and the date of pronouncement was September 6, 2023.
This appeal has been filed against the order of CIT(A)-27, New Delhi dated September 30, 2022, for the assessment year 2020-21.
The Tribunal observed that the assessee, Jyotsna Suri, had declared the two watches in question in her Wealth Tax Return. The CIT(A) examined the assessment order and the explanation provided by the assessee and agreed with the assessee’s submission, deleting the addition of Rs.8,29,850/- while upholding the remaining addition of Rs.48,48,660/- under Section 69A of the Act.
The CIT(A) upheld the addition of Rs.48,48,660/- and deleted the other part of the addition of Rs.8,29,850/- related to two watches. The CIT(DR) could not controvert the factual position that the watches were declared in the Wealth Tax Return. Therefore, the CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee based on the correct appreciation of facts.
The CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.1,15,36,269/- on account of unexplained jewellery found in a locker. The CIT(DR) argued that the jewellery was unexplained, but the CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee, concluding that the jewellery was acquired before the block period and could not be considered unexplained in the year of search.
The CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.5,51,570/- on account of unexplained foreign currency found during the search, concluding that the currency belonged to Mrs. Ritu Suri, not the assessee. This factual position was not controverted by the Assessing Officer or the CIT(DR).
The appeals of the revenue were dismissed, and the order of the CIT(A) was upheld. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly appreciated the facts and circumstances, granted relief to the assessee, and there was no valid reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the CIT(A).
Order pronounced in the open court on September 6, 2023, by Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member, and Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member.
DCIT Central Circle-17, New Delhi vs. Jyotsna Suri: Tax Dispute for AY 2020-21
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform