Tribunal held that as regards the cash found during the search, past savings of the family members could not be ignored while considering the amount as undisclosed income and in the absence of any clear-cut findings about the cash not representing and belonging to other family members as their past savings, it could not be treated as undisclosed income.  The penalty levied on this count was liable to be cancelled. As regards the jewellery it was explained that it belongs to family members  and old jewellery  the statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act itself would not either constitute incriminating material or undisclosed income in the absence of any corresponding asset or entry in the seized documents representing such income. Levy of penalty was deleted. As regards advance given for purchase of land, though there are deeming provisions under sections 69 and 69B, no new facts had been brought by the Revenue in order to controvert or rebut the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals)therefore, penalty was not imposable.(AY.2014-15)