TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Raman Kumar. The gift deed was executed on 16-1-2000 which was filed along with a photocopy of affidavit of the donor. The assessee also filed copy of bank account of donor. The gift was received by two cheques of Rs. 3 lakhs each dated 5-7-2000 and 24-7-2000 drawn on Vijay Bank, Bhorgarh, Delhi. The Assessing Officer recorded the statement of Mr. Raman Kumar, donor as well as Mr. Sunil Mittal donee, the assessee. Mr. Raman Kumar in his statement before the Assessing Officer stated that Mr. Sunil Mittal, donee had helped him in various times. At one time he met with an accident when nobody came to help him, Mr. Sunil Mittal the assessee helped him a lot. Relevant question answered in this regard from the statement of Mr. Raman Kumar are e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied with the arguments of the learned AR of the appellant that during assessment proceeding, the appellant established the identity of the donor (by providing the donor himself before the Assessing Officer along with assessment order for assessment year 2001-02 and IT PAN No. etc.) creditworthiness for making gift (by furnishing the Bank account of the donor which had sufficient balance from savings and business), justification for making the gift on the occasion of marriage. Simply because the donor stated before the Assessing Officer that the appellant had helped him in business, it could not be held that the gift was received in course of business. There is no restriction for making gift by a donor only to a person who is related to him. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT [2001] 250 ITR 667 . The ld. Departmental Representative also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Smt. Naushaba Rana v. Asstt. CIT [2007] 12 SOT 486 (Delhi). 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee on the other hand strongly relied upon finding in appellate order. He submitted that the amount was received as gift only and not in the course of carrying on the business. This fact has been confirmed by the donor as well as donee. The amount has been paid by account-payee cheque when the donor was possessing sufficient balance in his bank account. Due to the fact that the assessee helped the donor to set up his business and due to the fact that assessee was instrumental to save the life of donor while he met with an acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quisite. Secondly the amount was not received by the assessee in the course of carrying on his own business. The assessee helped the donor on various occasions. Thus it is not in the course of carrying on assessee s business that any benefit or perquisite was received. Rather the donor was helped by the assessee and the gift was given. Thus the same is outside the scope of income within the meaning of section 28( iv ) of the Act. Accordingly, the finding of the Assessing Officer is ill founded and the addition cannot be made under section 28( iv ) of the Act. As regards decision of Hon ble Madras High Court relied upon by ld. Departmental Representative, in the said case the assessee received an Ambassador Car as a gift under scheme formula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
