9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,000/- and amount available with assessee daughter at Rs. 1,00,000/-. 2. The ld CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,633/- out of car insurance, conveyance and telephone expenses." 2. First ground of assessee's appeal is against confirming the addition of Rs. 15,28,384/- out of addition of Rs. 19,41,200/- U/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) on account of daughter's marriage. The assessee has income from other sources. He filed return on 18/12/2008 declaring total income of Rs. 1,43,780/-. The case was scrutinized U/s 143(3) of the. The ld Assessing Officer observed that a search and seizure operation U/s 132 of the Act was carried out by the department at the instance of the assessee on 14/3/2008. During the course of search proceedings, books of account and loose documents were seized as per Annexure-A. Panchnama was prepared on the date of search as per Exhibit-A/1, loose papers 1 to 71 were seized. Seized papers No. 8 to 13, 16 to 27 and 51 were containing various details of marriage expenses of the Rubi, daughter of the assessee, which was solemnized on 06/7/2007. During the course of search operation proceeding on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not supported by vouchers. Scrutiny of cash account revealed that assessee has made drawings only Rs. 15,000/- on marriage expenses and the rest expenses for marriage has been done through borrowed funds. The assessee has given evidence of only Rs. 1,90,800/- regarding expenses incurred by assessee's brother for 'Engagement Function'. The balance amount of Rs. 21,47,000-(1,90,800+15,000) = Rs. 19,41,200/- is unexplained. As per seized page-13 of Annexure-A assessee has received amount of Rs. 12,85,000/- from Sh. Sunil Gattani. The assessee has filed letter and affidavit stating that Sh. Sunil Gattani was given closed envelope containing cash Rs. 7,85,000/- without knowing what was inside the envelope. As and when the assessee was requiring cash the assessee requested Sh. Sunil Gattani to given the envelope back which he gave back. Taking into fact and circumstances it is unbelievable that such huge amount has been taken without the other party knowledge. The contention and submission has been carefully considered which is an afterthought and concocted story that the assessee has received and amount of Rs. 12,85,000/- without the knowledge of Sh. Sunil Gattani. Thus asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f search. It was further contended that Rs. 10 lacs was received from Sh. Anpnd Prakash Agarwal whose confirmation was also filed during the assessment proceedings and that the daughter of the assessee herself being famous artist, painter and advertisement designer also incurred certain expenses. It was also stated that father-in-law of the assessee Sh. Manik Chand Gattani also incurred Rs. 163500/- which was drawn from bank account. However the AO was not convinced with the explanation of the appellant. The AO's case is that during the course of search the assessee has not pointed out that Rs. 10 lac was given by Sh. Anand Prakash Agarwal for marriage expenses and that such explanation was simply an afterthought. It is also stated that, receipt of Rs. 10 lacs from Sh. Anand Prakash Agarwal is also not evidenced in page no. 13 of the seized documents in which the source of expenditure of Rs. 21.47 lacs is shown. As regards the contention of the assessee that on 6.7 2007 there were two marriages, one of assessee's daughter and another marriage of daughter Sh. Anand Prakash Agarwal, the AO observed that the cash extract seized during the course of search does not show any common expe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g very systematic details of expenditure incurred by the appellant on the marriage of his daughter. It is undisputed fact that during the course of search statement of the appellant was recorded u/s 132(4) of IT Act and in answer to question no. 23 the appellant has very specifically admitted that on the basis of page no. 8 & 9 an expenditure of Rs. 1716400/- was incurred on the marriage of his daughter. It was also stated that such documents were maintained/ written by wife of the appellant. It is a settled law that the statement recorded u/s 132(4) is having valid evidentiary value. Moreover the appellant has never retracted to his statement in respect of incurring of expenditure. There is nothing on record which may indicate that such statement was recorded under duress. First of all it may be stated that the appellant has given almost contradictory statement in respect of expenditure incurred on the marriage of his daughter at the time of search, at the time assessment proceeding and at the time of appellate proceedings. It may be noted that at the time of search total expenditure was stated to be incurred for Rs. 3-3.50 lacs except some expenditure incurred by other family mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the total expenditure incurred by appellant remains at Rs. 21.47 lacs. The genuineness of such available fund as claimed by the appellant in the written submission is being examined and discussed as under. The availability of fund amounting to Rs. 190800/- from Sh. Jugal Kishore Naval and Rs. 15000/- from the assessee himself has already been accepted by the AO. As regards the availability of Rs. 163600/- from Sh. Manak Chand Gattani it is claimed that Sh. Manak Chand Gattani is the father-in-law of the assessee (maternal uncle of daughter of the appellant) and that he contributed such amount on the marriage. For such submission confirmation of Sh. Manak Chand Gattani and bank account of Sh. Manak Chand Gattani was filed. On careful consideration of such explanation and perusal of confirmation as also the bank statements filed by Sh. Manak Chand Gattani it is noted that Sh. Manak Chand Gattani is pensioner getting pension of Rs. 6500-7000 approximately and having his bank account with SBBJ, Makrana and perusal of such account indicate that the appellant was having very nominal balances in such account. In fact the available balance in such account has rarely exceeded Rs. 5000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the marriages were solemnized on the same place i.e. Issarda Palace, Jaipur. But the important pointed to be noted is that the expenditure of Rs. 21.47 lacs was only in respect of marriage expenses of the daughter of appellant. In fact nature of expenses recorded on page 8, 9, 10 and 13 very clearly indicate that such expenses were not of common nature and these expenses were of very specific nature pertaining to the appellant only. In this background even if Rs. 10 lac has been withdrawn by Sh. Anand Prakash Agarwal, it cannot be said and believed that such amount of Rs. 10 lacs was incurred against such expenditure of Rs. 21.47 lacs. Therefore such availability of fund amounting to Rs. 10 lacs cannot be accepted. As regards another availability of Rs. 1 lac by way of gifts it is stated that as a social custom all persons attending a marriage gives gifts either in the form of any items or an envelope containing cash and that the assessee has received approximately one lac from various persons. This fact is also stated to be evident from the recording in the seized paper. On careful consideration of relevant fact including the seized document it is noted that there is ment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee who is artist, painter and advertisement designer and was stated to be having income of Rs. one lac approximately each year, it may stated that such submission and explanation is also without any documentary evidence in as much as if the daughter of appellant was having income of Rs. 1 lac every year, the accumulation of funds by way of savings should have been reflected by way of bank balance etc. The appellant also did not submit any such explanation for availability of Rs. 1 lac when statement was recorded u/s 132(4). Therefore such submission is also prima facie an afterthought. Keeping in view facts and circumstances discussed above, the source of funds amounting to Rs. 618616(190800+15000+100000+312816) can only be considered to be of explained nature. Accordingly out of total addition of Rs. 1941200/- addition of Rs. 412816/- (312816+100000) is deleted and addition of Rs. 1528384/- is confirmed. The ground of appeal is partly allowed. 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted as under:- 1. The AO on the basis of Pg. 13 of annexure A-1 took total expenditure on marriage is Rs. 21.47 lacs. This is confirmed by CIT(A). This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 17,16,400/- and as per Pg 13 of Annexure A-1 , it is noted at Rs. 16,47,000/-. The AO/CIT(A) have accepted the source to the extent of Rs. 6,18,616/-. (1,90,800+15,000+1,00,000+3,12,816). The explanation of the assessee in respect of the remaining expenditure of Rs. 10,28,384/- (1647000-618616), the observation of the CIT(A) and the further explanation of the assessee is tabulated as under:- S. No Contribution made by and amount Explanation of the assessee Observation of CIT(A) Contention of the assessee 1. Manak Chand Gattani Rs. 1,63,600/- He is father in law of the assessee. As per the custom he contributed this amount for the marriage. In support of this, his confirmation and the bank account was filed. This confirmation and affidavit was not controverted by the AO. Sh. Manak Chand Gattani is pensioner getting pension of Rs. 6500-7000 approx. The perusal of his bank account shows that he is having very nominal balances in his account. Further, most of the withdrawn was made either before the date of marriage or subsequent to the date of marriage. Moreover during the course of search no such amount was stated to have been received from him. No material is brought on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as set apart certain jewellery as per her will dt.5-4- 2000 to be utilized on occasion of marriage of Ruby. Smt. Rukma Gattani expired in June 2005 & accordingly as per her will Sh. Manak Chand Gattani handed over the jewellery to assessee on the occasion of marriage having present value of Rs. 378000/-. Copy of will, letter and affidavit by Sh. Manak Chand Gattani confirming handing over the jewellery was filed to the AO. No such facts were stated during the course of search in the statement by the appellant. The submission appears to be an afterthought. Even if such jewellery was there the evidence of selling the same and getting Rs. 3,78,000/- should be available. However, no such documents have been filed. Further Smt. Rukmani Gattani is stated to have expired in June, 2005 and it is not known as to when the said jewellery exactly handed over to the appellant or the daughter of the appellant. Only because assessee has not stated the fact of the jewellery set apart by the grand mother-in-law of the assessee in course of search, the explanation of the assessee cannot be considered to be an afterthought more particularly when no evidence is brought on record by any of the lower ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich was met out of the gift received has been given by the ld CIT(A). As per assessee, finally expenditure remains to be explained at Rs. 15.47 lacs. The assessee further explained that he has received Rs. 1,63,600/- from Sh. Manak Chand Gattani, father in law of the assessee, but there is no evidence furnished by the assessee that Shri Gattani has capacity to contribute such amount as he is pensioner and getting pension of Rs. 6500-7000 approximately per month. Further the assessee claimed that there was a common marriage ceremony on that date i.e. marriage of both sons of Sh. L.N. Mundra was also solemnized on 06/7/2007 and common expenses were shared equally by the assessee and Shri Anand Prakash Agarwal and he sent Rs. 10 lacs for his share. But whatever expenses calculated by the Assessing Officer was related to only his daughter's marriage. The assessee has not correlated with evidence that there is source of Rs. 10 lacs and this amount was received for common expenditure. The assessee also claimed Rs. 3,78,000/- from Smt. Rukmani Gattani, mother in law of assessee and certain jewellery as per her Will dated 05/4/2000. These evidences were not found during the source of sear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
