TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A No.22/Rjt/2013 and appellant-assessee in ITA No.46/Rjt/2012 are husband and wife respectively. While Shri Mukeshbhai G. Rachchh claims to have received gift of ₹ 5,00,000/- in Assessment Year 2004-05 and another gift of same amount, i.e., ₹ 5,00,000/- in the Assessment Year 2005-06, his wife Smt Alkaben Mukeshbhai Rachchh also claims to have received gift of ₹ 5,00,000/- in the Assessment year 2005-06. The gifts so claimed to have been received by both the assessees were credited in their respective books of accounts. On being called upon to explain the nature and source of the impugned credits in their books of account, both the assessees claimed that the impugned sums represented gifts received by them. Neither the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee. The appeal filed by the assessee was accordingly disposed of ex-parte qua the assessee by this Tribunal on 05.10.2012. 4. In the MA filed by the assessee, it is stated that there was mistake and misunderstanding on the part of the ld Authorized Representative in taking down the next date of hearing, i.e., 04.10.2012 and that it was for this reason that the assessee was not represented before this Tribunal on 04.10.2012. We believe in the genuineness of the statement of the ld. Authorized Representative that there was mistake on his part in noting the date on which the appeal was adjourned for hearing. We therefore recall our order dated 05.10.2012 in ITA No.46/Rjt/2012. The aforesaid appeals stand restored for a fresh hearing and d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring on the genuineness of the gift received by her. These facts are duly discussed in the Assessment Order. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee neither knew the donor personally nor was she her relative nor was there any occasion on which the donor could gift her such hefty amount of ₹ 5,00,000/-. Relying upon the judgment of this Tribunal in D.C. Rastogi (HUF) v. ACIT, 57 ITD 295, the Assessing Officer held that the impugned gift was not genuine. 6. On appeal, the ld CIT(A) has confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer in this behalf. He also relied upon the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Dinesh Babulal Thakkar, 39 SOT 332. He noticed that the assessee and her husband have been claiming to have re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is essentially a question of fact as to whether a particular gift is genuine or not. Similarly, the issue as to whether the assessee has been able to satisfactorily explain the nature and source of credit entries found recorded in his books is also a question of fact. Judicial decisions help us in understanding the legal position. We have perused all the judgments cited by the assessee in her paper-book and taken note of the principles emerging from them. The fact of the matter, however, is that the issue with regard to genuineness of gift is essentially a question of fact. 10. We have carefully gone through the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer and the ld CIT(A). Both the authorities have concurrently recorded findings of fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
