COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. KIRAN DEEPAK KUKREJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals are filed by the Revenue to challenge the orders of Tribunal wherein the Tribunal by following its decision in the case of Uttamchand Jain has deleted the addition of undisclosed income made by the AO. It may be noted that the appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CIT vs. Uttamchand Jain (2009) 224 CTR (Bom) 473 : (2009) 26 DTR (Bom) 23 : (2009) 182 Taxman 243 (Bom) has been dismissed by this

(2.) THE respondents ('assessees' for short) are all dealers in diamonds. Each of the assessees had declared certain diamond jewellery under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 ('VDIS, 1997' for short). The said declaration was accepted by the Department and a certificate was issued to the respective assessees under VDIS, 1997.

(3.) THE assessees claimed to have sold the jewellery declared under VDIS, 1997 in the year relevant to asst. yr. 1998 -99 and offered to tax the capital gains arising from the respective sales. The AO disallowed the claim of the assessees on the ground that the persons to whom the jewellery was sold had stated in their statements that the transactions were not genuine and although, later on the statement was retracted and an affidavit was filed on oath to effect that the transactions were genuine, the transactions were not proved. Challenging the aforesaid orders, appeals were filed and ultimately the Tribunal following its decision in the case of Uttamchand Jain (supra) allowed the claim of the assessees and deleted the additions. Challenging the aforesaid orders, present appeals are filed.