9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise to this appeal may be summarized as under: 2.1 A search under section 132 of the Act was carried out in the cases of Nopany Group, Vadodara on 29th September 2011. It appears that the assessee is connected with the Nopany Group. A search was conducted of the premise of the assessee. A notice under Section153A( a) of the Act was issued to the assessee requiring the assessee to furnish the return of the income. It appears that in the course of the search undertaken of the residential premises of the assessee, few documents were recovered. It was revealed that the assessee had received an amount of Rs. 16,00,00,000/[ Rupees Sixteen Crore] by way of a gift from one Shri Narotam Sekhsariya. The donor happens to be the brotherinlaw of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proviso to s.56(2) read with explanation (ii) and (vii). Thus, it is held that the gifts of Rs. 5 Crore in both the years received from Narottam Sekhsaria, being from a "relative", is, Brother-in-law of the appellant is not taxable u/s.56. The gifts having been fully established as genuine and from explained sources, the receipts are also not taxable u/s.68. Thus, the addition of Rs. 5 crore each made by the AO for both the assessment years under appeal is not sustainable and therefore, the same is deleted. The appellant gets equivalent relief. The related grounds succeed." 2.3 The revenue being dissatisfied with the order passed by the CIT(Appeals) preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2.4 The appellate tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned. Thus, in the absence of any infirmity in the order passed by the Learned CIT (A) we decline to interfere with the same. Hence, the Revenue's Appeal is dismissed." 2.5 Being dissatisfied with the order passed by the appellate tribunal, the revenue is here before this Court with the present appeal. 3. The revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law: [A] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is right in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,00,00,000/for A.Y.2008-09 on account of so called gift claimed to have been received from the relative without appreciating that the donor of the gift does not fall within the definition of relative as envisaged under explanatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al- (A) spouse of the individual; (B) brother or sister of the individual; (C) brother or sister of the spouse of the individual; (D) brother or sister of either of the parents of the individual; (E) any lineal ascendant or descendant of the individual; (F) any lineal ascendant or descendant of the spouse of the individual; (G) spouse of the person referred to in items (B) to (F); and 6. The plain reading of the aforesaid provision would indicate that the assessee would fall within the definition of the term "relative" as explained under Section56 of the Act. 7. In the overall view of the matter, we are convinced with the reasons assigned by the appellate tribunal. We are of the view that none of the questions of la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
