TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, rejected. The assessee claimed to have received an amount of ₹ 25.90 Lacs (rounded off) which at the relevant time was sizable. The assessee failed to even produce must basic details pertaining to the donors. He had never claimed any relations with such persons. The assessee, in plain terms, even failed to establish the donors donee relationship as well as to disturb the stand of the Assessing Officer that the factum of unknown persons giving such sizable gifts without any occasion runs contrary to basis probability of human conduct. All in all, the entire issue is based on facts. The CIT(A) and the Tribunal concurrently held that the gifts were not genuine. Minimum consequences of such findings would be that the amount in quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ff) which was credited in the capital account of the assessee in the current year. Such gifts were as under:- Sr. No. Name of the donor of gift Resurgent India Certificate No. Amount US $ Indian Rate Per $ Indian Rupees 1 Mani Thyagarajan B050777-B050777 5000 45 225000 2 Alok P. Jain B077574-B077574 5000 45 225000 3 Bhatia Dayal Chellaram ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2590343 The Assessing Officer confronted the assessee primarily on the issue of genuineness of the gifts and after hearing the assessee held that the gifts were not genuine. He noted that the assessee was given several opportunities asking him to show the relationship between him and the donors and also to show credit worthiness. He was also asked to specify the investment made through such gifts. The assessee pointed out to the Assessing Officer that the gifts were received from third parties and it was, therefore, not possible for him to collect such details. The Assessing Officer disbelieved the gifts and added such income as assessee's unexplained cash credit in terms of Section 68 of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom 1.6.1994. Thus, by virtue of this amendment, an Additional Commissioner of Income Tax was included in the definition of Assessing Officer . It is true, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee that when the Additional Commissioner passed the order of assessment, Section 2(7A) did not contain a specific reference of an Additional Commissioner. However, when the statute has been amended with retrospective effect, the effect of such amendment must be applied to the pending proceedings as in the present case. Non-applying such amendment in the present proceedings would destroy the retrospectivity granted to it by the legislature. This contention of the assessee is, therefore, rejected. 5. In the context of the additions ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
