During search, gold and silver worth Rs. 1.11 crores was found.  Assessee admitted during course of search that out of this valuables worth Rs. 70 lakhs were acquired out of its unaccounted sources of income. Assessing Officer held  that assessee had only offered Rs. 41.03 lakhs for taxation in return of income out of surrendered amount made an addition of difference of Rs. 28.96 lakhs as unexplained investment under section 69A. CIT(A) affirmed the addition. On appeal  it was found that total gold jewellery found at time of search was 3592.896 grams and valuable of silver was 26983 grams.  In statement recorded during search assessee submitted that he was not aware about gold ornaments held by his mother, wife and himself, his son and his son’s wife which family had received on various family occasions.  Assessee submitted that to buy mental peace at time of search he surrendered a sum of Rs. 70 lakhs in respect of these valuables.  As per CBDT guideline, total gold holding by 3 married ladies and two male members of 1700 grams was considered as reasonable and assessee had claimed 1450 grams-In respect of silver items/valuation, weight of found items was 26,983 grams out of which 17,400 grams was declared in wealth tax return and balance amount was considered as income.Addition made by Assessing Officer merely on reasons that assessee had at time of recording of statement under section 132(4) admitted lumpsum sum as unexplained investment which was not found correct could not be sustained. Income offered by assessee is  justified, and therefore  addition is deleted.  Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 3 lakhs treating as unexplained cash seized during search and Commissioner (Appeals) had granted relief of only Rs. 1 lakh to assessee considering stature of assessee. On appeal the Tribunal held that  therefore there is  no reason to sustain addition of Rs. 2 lakhs in hands of assessee when assessee had disclosed income. (AY. 2017-18)