9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1684X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against impugned order dated 05.09.2013, passed by CIT(A) -39, Mumbai in relation to the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) for the assessment year 2003-04. The assessee is mainly aggrieved by the levy of penalty of Rs. 2,87,700/- on account of "gift" which were treated as 'income from other sources' u/s 68. 2. Despite service of notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o was also issued summons u/s 131 directly by the AO asking him to appear personally. However, the said donor did not attend in person albeit filed a letter dated 05.03.2008 furnishing the relevant details of a gift given to the assessee and also his return of income. The AO from such details noted that the donor had shown smaller taxable income of Rs. 1,04,280/- and agriculture income of Rs. 50,2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee is concerned, the onus stood discharged. However, both the AO as well as CIT(A) have confirmed the said penalty. 5. After considering the relevant finding given in the impugned orders and arguments placed by the DR, we find that the primary ingredient of proving the nature and source of credit which here in this case is "gift" of Rs. 10 lakhs has been discharged/shown in the following manner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that, the donor has given "gift' aggregating to Rs. 1,10,00,000/- to 11 members of EURO Group including the assessee which is not a normal human conduct/behavior. Even though the said addition has attained finality in the quantum proceedings but they cannot be held as final or conclusive so far as penalty proceedings are concerned, because the assessee from the same material can point out the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings are concerned. Once the donor has furnished his bank statement from where the amount of gift has been given, the copy of his income tax return before the AO, then without any rebuttal of such evidences by any specific enquiry, the penalty cannot be sustained. Accordingly, under the facts and circumstances, we delete the levy of penalty of Rs. 2,87,700/- and accordingly, ground raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
