TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent by : Shri N.K.Saini ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM The present appeal fi led by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.01.2011 passed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ( in short 'the Act' ) . 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the fol lowing Grounds of Appeal: 1. That the order passed u/s 250(6) by the ld. CIT(A) Chandigarh in Appeal No.386/P/09-10 dated 19.01.2011 is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) gravely erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.21,07,513/- which represented the amount received as shoguns on behalf of his daughter Ms. Radhika Lal at the time of her marriage. 3. That in the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m NRI relatives and friends on the occasion of the marriage of assessee's daughter. The AO afforded opportunity to the assessee to show cause as to why the provisions of Section 56(2) (vi ) of the Act may not be invoked in the present case as the gifts have been received by the assessee and not by the daughter of the assessee. 7. In para 2.3 of the assessment order, the AO recorded his categorical findings on the issue, which are reproduced hereunder : 2.3 In the submission the counsel has submitted that the gifts on account of daughter s marriage are not to be treated as income from other sources. As per Section mentioned above, any sum of money received on the occasion of the marriage of the individual is not to be included in income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the submission made by the assessee in the matter is purely stereo type and does not prove his case. It was further highlighted by the ld. CIT(A) that the money was never transferred to the account of the assessee's daughter. The findings of the ld. CIT(A) are reproduced hereunder : 7. I have considered the rival contentions and material on record and I am incl ned to agree with the ld. AO since none of the cheques are in the name of the daughter of the appellant Smt.Radhika Uppal . The counsel argued that the shoguns are never given to the bride but to her parents to which I agree to some extent but that is normally when one attends a wedding, the shoguns are given to the parents who receive the guests. But if someone sends a cheque fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... but some business compulsions hold us back. Please accept our heartiest congratulations on this event and our best wishes for the couple. Since I am not sure of Radhika having a Bank Account, I am enclosing a Cashier s Check for USD 5100/- (No.012104) dated 03.04.2006 in your name, the amount of which you may kindly pass on to her. 11. In view of the above, I agree with the finding of the AO that the amounts are covered u/s 56 and have to be treated in the hands of the appellant as such, the addition so made is therefore, confirmed, dismissing this ground of appellant. 9. A perusal of the provisions of Section 56(1) sub-clause (vi ) read with second proviso to Section 56(1) sub-clause (vii ) clearly reveals that the provisions of Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Article the and not indefinite Article a before the word individual in clause b of the said proviso, which means the specific individual . Thus, the legislative intent is clear in meaning, content and text of the word individual . It is settled law of interpretation of statute that primacy is to be given to the text in which the intention of the law-giver has been expressed. In view of this, the case law relied upon by the ld. 'AR' does not support his contention. The assessee has failed to demonstrate non-applicability of the provision of Section 56(1) (vi ) read with second proviso thereunder. Further, routing transaction through banking channel represents merely movement of funds and not the genuineness of transactions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
