TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ves to be allowed. Addition u/s 41(1) - amount transferred to the capital account of the assessee, who is a partner in the firm, Bhopal Garage & Service Station from loan account of his brother, in the same firm held as waiver of loan as gift but taxable u/s 41(1) - Held that:- From records genuineness of gift is established. Since it is money from the brother in the form of gift, section 41(1) is not attracted - Decided in favor of assessee Credit in the capital account of the assessee from the gifts received in ring ceremony of son - Held that:- Receiving of gift was accepted by the Assessing Officer, therefore, this addition is also deleted. - ITA No.160/Ind/2012 - - - Dated:- 20-7-2012 - SHRI JOGINDER SINGH AND SHRI R.C. SHA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The impugned amount was claimed to be made by Shri Henry Garg for which our attention was invited to page 105 to 106 of the paper book which is the statement of Shri Paramjeet Singh Bedia (the assessee) recorded on 20.12.2007 wherein it has been specifically tendered that the impugned amount was made from the account of Shri Henry Garg vide cheque no. 926533. At page 106 of the statement (of the paper book) it has been clarified that the date was wrongly mentioned as 14.7.2002 in place of 14.7.2003. This factual matrix was not controverted by the Revenue. It was asserted that since Shri Henry Garg has already left India, therefore, he could not be produced and due to this situation during survey u/s 133A of the Act on 21st September, 2005 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the aforementioned facts, we find that the impugned amount was disallowed merely on the ground that the impugned payment was paid by cheque dated 14.7.2002. From the aforestated facts, we find that it is a typographical and in fact the payment was made on 14.7.2003 vide cheque no. 926533 (page 16 of the paper book). Another reason for making the addition was that confirmation was not filed. However, we find that such confirmation was filed from Shri Henri Garg as reproduced hereinabove which is part of the paper book, therefore, from both the angles, the claim of the assessee deserves to be allowed, therefore, this ground of the assessee is allowed. 4. The next ground pertains to holding that that the amount of Rs.12,55,000/- transferr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the use of the donee and the donee accepted the waiver. This gift deed is duly signed by both the brothers (donee and the donor) duly witnessed by two persons and further attested by notary, Bhopal, and identified by another person, This factual matrix is not controverted by the Revenue. So far as the contention of the learned Senior DR that section 41(1) is attracted, we are of the view that since it is money from the brother in the form of gift, this section is not attracted, therefore, this ground of the assessee is allowed. 6. The last ground pertains to holding that the credit of Rs.1,16,215/- in the capital account of the assessee from the gifts received in ring ceremony of son was unexplained and confirming the addition. 6.1 The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
