TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent : Ms. Ishita Rawat for Gunjan Pathak JUDGMENT 1. In both these appeals, common questions of law and facts are involved, hence they are decided by this common judgment. 2. By way of these appeals, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the appeal of the Department, confirming the order of CIT (A). 3. This Court while admitting the appeals framed the following substantial questions of law: In DBITA No. 330/2017 i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal has erred in confirming the order of CIT(A) who deleted the addition of ₹ 37,03,900/- on account of unexplained cash deposits made in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposited in bank out of cash gift received from father Shri Narayan Lal Choudhary. From the above it is clear that assessee himself was not clear till 11.09.2013 that assessee had received unsecured loans of ₹ 27 lacs, or gift from Sh. Narain Lal (individual- PAN AFGPC7585P) or gift from HUF and how much gift received from Individual/HUF. Sh. Girish Garg CA filed capital a/c and balance sheet of assessee and Sh. Narain Lal Choudhary as on 31.03.2011 with his letter dated 11.09.2013. Again the A/R of assessee on 28.10.2013 filed different capital a/c and statement of affairs of both assessee as well as his father Shri Narayan Lal Choudhary as on 31.03.2011. There was a drastic change in both capital account and atatement of affa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat Sh. Narayan Lal Choudhary, has given a gift of ₹ 9,00,000/- instead of ₹ 27,00,000/-. Further it is seen that Sh. Narayan Lal Choudhary, has given ₹ 14 lacs as unsecured loans to the assessee for purchase of Factory land F-131-132, RICO, Industrial Area, Kekri. This loan of ₹ 14,00,000/- for the purchase of Kekri Land stands verified from the bank account of Shri Narayan Lal Choudhary. 5. He has further taken us to the observations made by the AO while imposing penalty which reads as under: The imposition of penalty u/s 271D of IT Act, 1961, in this case is supported by various judicial pronouncements. In the case of Kum. A.B. Shanthi, 255 ITR 258 (SC) the Hon ble Court held that the object of introducin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lar income tax assessee. It is also submitted that the source of income of assessee s father Sh. Narayan Lal is from pension/interest. The source of income of the Narayan Lal HUF is from agriculture whereas the source of income of his mother Smt. Manbhari Devi is from dairy, capital gain and income from other sources. During the assessment proceeding, AO noticed that as per AIR Information, there is a cash deposit of ₹ 25,46,000/-= in ICICI Bank account. On further, enquiry, it is noticed that there is a total deposit of ₹ 37,03,900/- in assessee s various bank accounts which is unexplained. AO further observed that assessee s claim cash gift of ₹ 9lacs received from his father Sh. Narayan Lal, and cash gift of ₹ 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew of facts narrated above it is seen that source of cash deposits made in bank accounts are fully explained from the cash flow statement and donors have got sufficient funds in their hands for providing gift to the assessee. Even AO has on the basis of enquiries conducted could not point out any defects in the evidences filed. 7. He contended that CIT (A) has misconstrued the complete question inasmuch as the assessee himself in his own statement which are reflected as hereinabove has changed his stand from time to time. Initially he has shown unsecured loans but thereafter he has shown gift. Again on 28.10.2013 he has admitted the amount as gift of ₹ 9 lac and another ₹ 14 lac unsecured loan and then again 24 lac as gift ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
