Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2011 (2) TMI 532

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../- made by the assessing officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on account of alleged NRI gifts shown by the assessee from Sh. Sukhchain Ram Sallan and Neeraj Kumar Gupta as the alleged donors were complete strangers whose financial capacity was not proved and the assessee even failed to demonstrate any occasion for the alleged donor to make such huge gift to the assessee?   ii) Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.2,00,000/- made by the assessing officer on account of commission paid by the assessee for arranging the bogus NRI gifts of Rs.10,00,000/-?"   2. The facts necessary for adjudication....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e CIT (A), the revenue approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short "the Tribunal") who vide order dated 23.8.2004, upheld the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present appeal by the revenue.   3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The point for consideration in this appeal is whether the alleged gift received by the respondent-assessee from Non-resident Indian with whom the assessee had no relationship was a genuine gift or not?   5. The aforesaid issue is no longer res integra. This Court in a recent judgment passed in ITA No. 392 of 2005 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Sh. Kamal Gupta) decided on 20.1.2011, had laid down as under:-   "The assessee failed to ....