Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 1160 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (11) TMI 1160 - ITAT MUMBAI - TMI - Unexplained cash credit - addition u/s 68 - income from other sources - Held that:- We have observed that the ld CIT(A) while disposing the appeal of the assessee, instead of examining the gift from the angel of section 68 of the Act, examined the same under section 56 of the Act. The ld CIT(A) concluded that cousin sister did not fall under the category of ‘relative’ as per explanation attached with section 56(2) (v) and therefore the impugned gift is li .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t in United Bank of India & in HDFC Bank are concerned, the Revenue authority has not disputed the withdrawal of cash from her bank on earlier dates. The objection of Revenue is only that cash deposit varies at different occasions and frequent cash deposit itself establishing non-genuine character of the explanation offered. However, the contention of the assessee throughout the assessment proceedings and appellate stage was that, amount was withdrawn for the expenses to be incurred for marriage .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y pleaded that the cash was withdrawn for specific utilization and the same was deposited is based only on hypothetication of the Revenue authorities. Thus, the addition on account of cash credit is deleted. - ITA No. 7625/Mum/2012 - Dated:- 30-9-2016 - SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Prakash K. Jotwani (AR) For The Revenue : Shri B. S. Bist (DR) ORDER PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: 1. 1. This appeal u/s. 253 of the Income-tax Act (Act) is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssment order dated 16.12.2008. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) but without any success. Thus, this second appeal is filed before us u/s. 253 of the Act. 3. We have heard the Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) of the assessee and the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for Revenue and perused the material available on record. The Ld. AR for assessee argued that the assessee received gift of ₹ 10,00,000/- from his brother. Assessee furnished the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

IT(A) not considered the fact in a proper manner. Against the unexplained cash credit of ₹ 5,49,500/- it was argued by the ld. AR of the assessee that assessee had withdrawn the cash from Bank A/c in United Bank of India for making expenses in the marriage of her son. As the marriage could not take place, the said amount was again deposited back in the Bank A/c. The Ld. AR of the assessee further argued that he has placed on record the copy of confirmation gift of ₹ 1,00,000/- from N .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nels were not disputed by the AO. The revenue authority has also not disputed that assessee withdrew the cash from his bank account. The Revenue authorities disputed the genuinity of the transaction. On the other hand the ld. DR for Revenue argued that the assessee has not filed any proof regarding marriage of her son. It was argued that, if the purpose of marriage was not fulfilled then the amount should have been deposited in the Bank immediately. The huge cash transaction was against of possi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ve the creditworthiness, genuineness of the gift, bank statement of donor and relationship with the donor, loan confirmation of bank and complete statement of account of United Bank of India. The assessee filed its reply and contended that the assessee received ₹ 1,00,000/- from her son Neeraj Kalro, ₹ 10,00,000/- from Gopal Chabria and ₹ 300,000/- from Sh Vasudev Chabaria. It was further contended that Neeraj Kalro has been filing return from last several years. The copy of ca .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the same was added u/s. 68 as an unexplained cash credit. In respect of gift from Gopal Chabria, the AO concluded that the assessee has not furnished the original statement of donor and their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction is not established and the addition was made u/s 68 of the Act. The explanation of gift from Vasudev Chabaria was accepted. With regard to cash deposit of ₹ 5,49,500/- on various dates in United Bank of India & HDFC Bank, the assessee was asked .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a is residing at Dubai from last 24 years and settled there. The donor confirmed that a gift of ₹ 10,00,000/- was given to his cousin sister Miss. Rani Kalro (assessee) and as per Explanation to section 56(2), the cousin sister did not fall in the category of relative, therefore, the said amount is taxable u/s 56(2)(v) of the Act. For gift of ₹ 1,00,000/-, it was hold by ld. CIT(A) that cash was deposited in the donor s Bank Account immediately prior to issuance of cheque. And in res .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

habria was also not disputed. The gift of ₹ 10,00,000/- was through banking channel. We have further seen that the assessee has placed on record the certificate of Punjab & Sindh Bank dated 01.03.2014, which contained the reference of Cheque No. 387627 dated 01.02.2006, copy of Cheque dated 01.02.2006 drawn on Punjab & Sindh Bank, Kazi Syeed Street, Mumbai, and confirmation of donor dated 27.09.2008, 12.03.2008 & 29.10.2012. All these documents clearly established the creditwor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

We have observed that the ld CIT(A) while disposing the appeal of the assessee, instead of examining the gift from the angel of section 68 of the Act, examined the same under section 56 of the Act. The ld CIT(A) concluded that cousin sister did not fall under the category of relative as per explanation attached with section 56(2) (v) and therefore the impugned gift is liable to be taxed under this section. As per our opinion the case of the assessee may fall under clause (vi) instead of clause ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version