Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 1223 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s. 68 as unexplained cash credit of investment - Gift received by the assessee from his father - HELD THAT:- On going to the facts of the instant case, we observe that it is not disputed that the assessee had received the aforesaid gift from his father as ‘Gift”. Further, it is also observed that the aforesaid amount of gift had been declared by the assessee in his return of income for the impugned assessment year. Further, since the gift received by the assessee from his father is below the exemption limit of Rs. 50,000/-prescribed under Section 56 of the Act, looking into the facts of the instant case,the aforesaid addition is directed to be deleted. Unexplained income u/s 68 - addition based on retracted statement - HELD THAT:- As statement of the assessee on the basis of which additions were made dated 23.05.2008 was also subsequently retracted by the assessee on July 5, 2008. It is a well established law that no additions can be sustained in the hands of the assessee on the basis of a statement which has been reacted by the assessee. In the case of Chandrakumar Jethmal Kochar [2015 (11) TMI 285 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] held that merely on basis of admission that few benami concerns were being run by assessee, assessee could not be subjected to addition when assessee retracted from such admission and revenue could not furnish any corroborative evidence in support of such admission. Therefore, merely on the basis of the statement of the assessee, in our considered view, the additions cannot be sustained especially in light of the fact that the assessee has subsequently retracted the statement and further, the Department has not brought forth any corroborative evidences to sustain the additions in the hands the assessee during the impugned Assessment Year. Thus in respect of certain additions it is seen that there is concurrent inflow and outflow of Rs. 2 lakhs as evident from the from the statement made by the assessee, and the same being cross entries, therefore no addition can be sustained with respect to the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs. Further, on a perusal we agree with assessee that the sum of Rs. 50,000/- only represents an “outstanding” amount and does not mean that it is the disclosed income of the assessee. Accordingly, even on merits, certain additions are not sustainable in the hands of the assessee. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.
|