TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the light of this, it is clear that the observation of the ld CIT(A) is not correct that the money was withdrawn and kept by the donor for 15 days and then gifted to the appellant. The correct factual position as appearing from the record is that the amount was withdrawn on 10th July, 2008 and on the same date, the money was gifted to the appellant and thereafter the appellant after spending a part of amount, deposited remaining amount of ₹ 3,59,031/- in her and her son’s bank accounts. As regards, non appearance of the donor Shri P.M. Lodha before the Assessing Officer, it was submitted that the donor Shri P.M. Lodha is over 85 years of age and because of his age he could not appear before the Assessing Officer. However, he ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther erred in not accepting the facts that the so gifted amount of ₹ 3,90,000/- was from the Bank account of the petitioner s father and gifted to her daughter. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the authorities below have further erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3,90,000/- whereas the credit entry in the books of account is only ₹ 3,59,031/-. 4. That the facts mentioned by the AI as well as authorities below are not correct as the entries are duly confirmed from the petitioner s father bank account. 2. The assessee has raised four grounds of appeal. However, the effective ground is whether the ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3.90 lacs as undisclosed income and not acceptin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue, as both of them were having bank account at same place. Instead of giving gift through cheque, Shri P.M. Lodha went to the bank with a cheque in his own name, withdrawn cash of ₹ 3.90 lacs, brought it home and then gifted it to his daughter. No gift deed was executed at that time. Then after 15 days, out of the gift so received, the assessee carried the cash of ₹ 3,59,031/- to the bank and deposited in two separate accounts in odd figures of ₹ 59,766/- and ₹ 2,99,265/-. The ld Assessing Officer further noted that Shri P.M. Lodha is having capital of more than ₹ 5.50 crores as on 31/3/2011. His annual income is more than ₹ 82 lacs but his drawings for personal expenses are merely ₹ 40,000/- for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rawn funds amounting to ₹ 1.60 lacs from his various bank accounts, such as HDFC Bank, Andhara Bank and ICICI Bank whereas the ld Assessing Officer has considered the withdrawal from only HDFC bank. The ld CIT(A) noted that there was cash withdrawal of ₹ 3.90 lacs on 10/07/2008 whereas the appellant deposited cash in the bank account on 25/7/2008. Both the parties are having bank accounts in the same bank, therefore it is not believable that donor will withdraw money from the bank, keep it with him for 15 days and then gift the same to the appellant and appellant will deposit that money in the bank. Further the ld CIT(A) endorsed the fact in respect of withdrawal of ₹ 40,000/- by the father of the assessee by saying that p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubhash Nagar, CScheme, Jaipur. So in the light of this, it is clear that the observation of the ld CIT(A) is not correct that the money was withdrawn and kept by the donor for 15 days and then gifted to the appellant. The correct factual position as appearing from the record is that the amount was withdrawn on 10th July, 2008 and on the same date, the money was gifted to the appellant and thereafter the appellant after spending a part of amount, deposited remaining amount of ₹ 3,59,031/- in her and her son s bank accounts. As regards, non appearance of the donor Shri P.M. Lodha before the Assessing Officer, it was submitted that the donor Shri P.M. Lodha is over 85 years of age and because of his age he could not appear before the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
