9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that Shri Harinder Kumar Bhatia (HUF) has shown gift of Rs. 10,51,000/- in the capital account for assessment year 2004-05. In response to notice u/s 143(2), the assessee filed the evidence of gift received from Shri Sudhir Sachdeva, R/o E-72, Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi who is an income-tax payee and assessed to tax under ITO, Ward 32(4), New Delhi. The assessee filed the copy of income-tax return of the said donor. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, issued a letter to the ITO, Ward 32(4) for verification of the gift. However, no reply was received from the concerned Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer issued summon u/s 131 dated 03.12.2007 to both the donor as well as the donee for appearance before him on 12.12.2007. However, nobody appeared on that date. In view of the above and since assessment was getting time barred, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment by adding the gift received at Rs. 10,51,000/- to the total income of the assessee u/s 68 of the I.T. Act. 4. In appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition so made by the Assessing Officer. The Revenue filed an appeal befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the donor, source of money for pay order, and to ascertain the relationship between the assessee and Shri Sudhir Sachdeva, and the occasion & purpose for which the gift was stated to have been given by Shri Sudhir Sachdeva. The assessee shall be at liberty to produce and furnish any further evidences or materials before the AO in support of his case which, if so filed, shall be considered the AO. We order accordingly." 5. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, issued notice to the assessee u/s 143(2) dated 30.12.2011 fixing the case for hearing on 11.01.2012. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the following details :- "1. Copy of Computation of income and copy of ITR including balance sheet for F.Y. 2003-04 of Sh. Sudhir Sachdeva i.e. Donor. 2. Establish the relation between the donor and the assessee. 3. Purpose and occasion of the gift. 4. Photocopy of bank account of Sh. Sudhir Sachdeva for F.Y. 2003-04." 6. However, the assessee filed only the bank passbook of Shri Harinder Kumar Bhatia (HUF) and the copy of affidavit signed by Shri Sudhir Sachdeva and failed to furnish the remaining details. It was submitted b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant has already discharged the burden u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with regard to the receipt of gift of Rs. 10,51,000/-. 2. That the order passed by the Assessing Officer was further not legal as tenable under the law, because the Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that in support of the receipt of gift, the appellant has filed and placed upon records all the cogent evidences alongwith the copy of bank statement confirming the accumulated balance available with him wherefrom the Donor has given the gift to the appellant. 3. That the order passed is further unconstitutional as against the law and to the facts of the case, because the Assessing Officer has not given any adverse finding on the documentary evidences discharged by the appellant in support of the receipt of gift of Rs. 10,51,000/-. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed is further not legal as tenable because all the information / documents received by the Assessing Officer from the appellant were passed over to the concerned Assessing Officer of the Donor and thereafter no adverse finding if any has ever been received from him. 5. That the order passed is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ischarge the onus cast on him by producing the donor for examination of the Assessing Officer in terms of the ingredients of section 68 as per the direction of the Tribunal. Relying on various decisions, he submitted that the onus is always on the assessee to discharge the ingredients of section 68 by proving the identity and creditworthiness of the donor and the genuineness of the transaction to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. In the instant case, the assessee failed to do the same despite sufficient opportunities given by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings as well as remand proceedings. Therefore, the order of the ld. CIT(A) should be upheld and the assessee should not be given any further opportunity. 11. I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the authorities below. It is an admitted fact that when the matter was restored by the Tribunal to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the issue afresh by making further enquiries to find out the genuineness of the gift, creditworthiness of the donor, source of money for the pay order and to ascertain the relationship between the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
