TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2015-16 on 30.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 24,06,300. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and the case was subsequently taken up for scrutiny. The assessment was concluded under Section 143(3) of the Act, vide order dt.21.11.2017, wherein the assessee's income was determined at Rs. 34,56,300. This was in view of the Assessing Officer holding that the assessee was not able to establish the credit worthiness and capacity of his father Sri B.K. Ramakrishna to give the cash gift of Rs. 10,50,000 to the assessee in the year under consideration and consequently bringing the same unexplained gift to tax in the assessee's hands. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... copy of his PAN and Aadhaar card is submitted to the AO explaining the reasons for cash gift. No enquiries were conducted by AO, about the contents of the Gift deed. No material was brought on record by the Assessing Officer to show that the Gift deed submitted by the assessee, were not genuine. However the AO made addition in respect of Rs. 10,50,000/- as the father (donor) is not filing income tax returns. 2. Last para of the AO order dt:21.11.2017: "From the perusal of the details furnished by the assessee, it was noticed that the assessee has shown an amount of Rs. 10,50,000/-as gift from father. The assessee was asked to furnish the details, for which the assessee submitted a gift deed dated 25.09.2017, which was not accepted by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s father was not filing income tax returns" and it means the learned CIT (A) has not given his findings and simply added the words "and the sources of the funds were found not genuine" 3.2.2 In support of the submissions put forth the assessee cited / placed reliance on the following :- (i) SOP dt.10.01.2018 issued by CBDT. (ii) Cited Sec.56(2)(vii)(c) of the Act to submit that gift from father is not income. (iii) CIT Vs. P. Mohanakala (2007) 161 Taxman 169 (SC). (iv) LIC of India Vs. CIT (1996) 219 ITR 410 (SC). In view of the above, it was prayed that the addition of Rs. 10.5 lakhs made by Assessing Officer on account of unexplained gift be deleted and assessee's appeal be allowed. 3.3.1 Per contra, the learned Departmenta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the credit worthiness and capacity to advance the aforesaid gift. The undisputed fact that the assessee's father neither maintained a regular bank account nor filed returns of income only go to confirm the fact that he neither had the capacity nor credit worthiness to advance the aforesaid loan. The learned Departmental Representative contends that the findings rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of P Mohanakala (supra) actually supports the case of Revenue and since the assessee was not able to offer any proper, plausible or acceptable explanation in respect of the cash credit of Rs. 10.50 lakhs in his books of account, the authorities below have correctly brought to tax the said unexplained cash gift in the assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d / unproved gift. On appeal, the learned CIT (Appeals) upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee was not able to place on record any material evidence to establish the genuineness of the aforesaid cash gift of Rs. 10.50 lakhs. 3.4.2 In appellate proceedings before me also, the assessee was not able to bring on record any material evidence to prove, either the genuineness of the transaction of the aforesaid gift transaction by establishing the credit worthiness and capacity of his father to make the gift from any proved source of income OR to controvert the findings of the authorities below. I have also carefully perused the submissions put forth by the learned Authorised Representative of the assessee ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|