TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... affidavit to prove the genuineness of the gift and identity of the donor. The assessee is also aggrieved by the levy of penal interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who filed her return of income on 1-12-2003 declaring total income of Rs. 9,54,570. During the assessment proceedings under section 143(3) of the Act, Assessing Officer observed that the assessee s capital account has been credited by a gift of Rs. 2 lakhs from one Smt. Suman Kyal. The donor was produced by the assessee during the assessment proceedings for her examination and verification of assessee s claim of having received the above gift from her. The donor s sworn statement w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere was no particular occasion or reason for making the impugned gift and the gift is not at the instance of the donee but is as per the decision of her brother-in-law who is a chartered accountant and as such the authenticity of the assessee s claim is not proved. He, therefore, made the addition under section 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer and the assessee is in second appeal before us. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee while reiterating the submissions made by the assessee before the authorities below, drew our attention to the statement of Smt. Suman Kyal, the donor of the gift to demonstrate that there was relationship between the donor and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve and affection and the decision to give the gift should be her own decision and not at the instance of some other person. Further it is also seen that the donor has never gifted any such amounts to any other person. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. P. Mohanakala [2007] 291 ITR 278 , has held that where the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and source of the sums found credited in the books is not satisfactory and there is prima facie evidence against the assessee, viz., the receipt of money, the burden is on the assessee to rebut the same, and if he fails to rebut it, it can be held against the assessee that it was a receipt of an income nature. It was further held that the burden is on the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
