Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (6) TMI 892 - AT - Income TaxIncome from undisclosed sources - CIT(A) deleted the addition - source of cash of ₹ 13.01 lac deposited by the assessee in his bank account, which was claimd to have been received from the estate of Smt. Saroj Gupta, his mother, who passed away on 14.8.2006 as per assessee - Held that:- All the circumstances in the case prove it beyond any shadow of doubt that there was no cash in hand available as ‘Istridhan’ on the death of Smt. Saroj Gupta that was bequeathed by the assessee to the tune of ₹ 13.01 lac. Except for a bald claim of finding cash of ₹ 15.06 lac on the sudden opening of the almirah on the death of Smt. Saroj Gupta, there is no evidence about the source of the availability of cash to such a huge extent in her hands. In our considered opinion, the assessee just concocted a story of inheriting cash from his mother after her death. We are reminded of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Durga Prasad More (1971 (8) TMI 17 - SUPREME Court). In this case, it has been held that self serving recitals cannot be accepted as true unless the assessee proves it. In this case, the assessee tendered an explanation that she got the amounts from horse races, which was not accepted by the ITO who came to hold that the winning tickets were purchased by the assessee after the event. Upholding the view taken by the AO, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that for considering whether the apparent is real, the matter should be considered by applying the test of human probabilities. Viewed from that angle, the Hon’ble Summit court upheld the view canvassed by the AO that the explanation of the assessee was not genuine. In our considered opinion, the entirety of facts and circumstances prevailing in the instant case do lead to an irresistible conclusion that there was no cash available with Smt. Saroj Gupta at the time of her death and the assessee was not justified in claiming that a sum of ₹ 13.01 lac was bequeathed from his mother. We, therefore, overturn the impugned order on this score and restore the opinion of the AO. - Decided in favour of revenue.
|