TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 758X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amounts of gifts are less than ₹ 1 Lacs in each of the cases which was below exemption limit of ₹ 2 Lacs. Therefore, there would be no obligation on the donors to file the return of income. The gifts are duly supported by the affidavits of the donors. The details of agricultural land have been well enumerated in their respective affidavits. Regarding allegation of immediate cash deposit, the donors being agriculturist working in remote village would receive the proceeds of agriculture in cash. The cash deposit need not match with harvesting season since there is no such requirement under law. Therefore, these two additions would stand deleted. Low Household Drawings - HELD THAT:- Drawings made by the mother as well as gifts given by her are duly supported by her Balance Sheet as on 31/03/2014. It could be seen that she has capital balance of ₹ 1287.32 Lacs which has been invested in various forms. This capital balance is arrived at after reducing Gifts of ₹ 4.94 Lacs and withdrawals of ₹ 10.47 Lacs. The assessee s drawings in all the earlier years are less than ₹ 2 Lacs which is evident from detail of household expenses as placed on record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that pursuant to search action on Balaji Group on 28/01/2015, the premises of the assessee were also covered under the search. In response to notice u/s 153A, the assessee offered returned income of ₹ 6.45 Lacs which was the same as offered u/s 139(1). The assessee was saddled with various additions which are adjudicated as under: - 3. Gifts 3.1 The assessee received gifts of ₹ 0.98 Lacs from his brother-in-law namely Ramesh D. Gajera. Similar gift of ₹ 0.98 Lacs was received from cousin brother Shri Kishore D. Gajera. The assessee filed gift deed and evidence of land holding in support of donor s agricultural income. However, in the absence of return of income and bank statement of donors, the gifts were added to the income of the assessee u/s 68. 3.2 The assessee also received gift of ₹ 1 Lacs from his mother namely Smt. Santaben Vashrambhai Patodiya which was supported by gift deed and land holdings. However, bank statement was not filed. Further, donor had reflected income of ₹ 1.78 Lacs only. The donor had gifted amount of ₹ 4.94 Lacs to various other family members during the year. Therefore, rejecting assessee s explanation, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laneous income. However, upon perusal of her Balance Sheet as on 31/03/2014, as placed on record, it could be seen that she has capital balance of ₹ 1287.32 Lacs which has been invested in various forms. This capital balance is arrived at after reducing Gifts of ₹ 4.94 Lacs and withdrawals of ₹ 10.47 Lacs. The source of gift, in our opinion, could not solely be the current year s income particularly in view of the fact that the mother of the assessee was on old lady and living in a joint family. There is no adverse material to disprove the gifts. Therefore, the conclusion drawn by Ld. CIT(A) could not be sustained and we are inclined to delete the addition of ₹ 1 Lacs. 3.6 So far as the two other donors are concerned, we find that both of them are agriculturist which is supported by their land holdings. The amounts of gifts are less than ₹ 1 Lacs in each of the cases which was below exemption limit of ₹ 2 Lacs. Therefore, there would be no obligation on the donors to file the return of income. The gifts are duly supported by the affidavits of the donors. The details of agricultural land have been well enumerated in their respective affidavits. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 1287.32 Lacs which has been invested in various forms. This capital balance is arrived at after reducing Gifts of ₹ 4.94 Lacs and withdrawals of ₹ 10.47 Lacs. The assessee s drawings in all the earlier years are less than ₹ 2 Lacs which is evident from detail of household expenses as placed on record for various years. This being the case, this addition is not sustainable and hence, we delete the same. 5. Interest on Unsecured Loans 5.1 The assessee paid interest of ₹ 1.99 Lacs on unsecured loan of ₹ 14.60 Lacs taken in AY 2013-14 from Mr. Anil A. Bhuva. Since the loan was added back to assessee s income in earlier AY, the interest paid in this year was also disallowed and added back to assessee s income. The Ld. CIT(A), terming the addition to be consequential in nature, confirmed the addition. 5.2 Upon perusal of appellate order for AY 2013-14 as placed on record, we find that the adjudication of this addition has been held to be academic in nature in view of the fact that the assessee s legal ground was allowed. The department could not prefer any further appeal due to low tax effect. Thus, there are no concrete findings on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
