9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other sources. The assessee is also partner in the partnership firm M/s. Millennium Corporation and M/s. Millennium Enterprises. A Search action u/s. 132 was conducted on 28.01.2015 at the residential premises of the assessee. The assessee has received gift of Rs..1,99,725/- from Smt. Bhanuben B. Patel and gift of Rs..2,55,000/- from Smt Champaben Sojitra being a person covered by the definition of "relative" under Explanation (e) to section 56(2) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act") which have been disallowed and added back as unexplained gifts. The Assessing Officer before disallowing the same he has observed in his order that assessee has not filed return of income or bank statement of the donor, in the absence of which the genuinene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l the information about the identity and the source of the funds, and the revenue could have proceeded against the said Investor. The Hon'ble tribunal have relied upon the decision in case of Lovely exports private limited 319 ITR 5 (Supreme Court). The Hon'ble Supreme court in no uncertain terms has held that once the assessee has given the complete information about the investor and there is no contrary material available on record then the revenue should not proceed against the shareholder who has confirmed the transaction. The hon'ble Bombay high court while confirming the decision of Tribunal has relied upon the finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and has also held that the appellant is not expected to prove the source ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order dated 21" January 2015 had deleted the addition made u/s 68 by the assessment officer. The Hon'ble tribunal had held that the assessee had discharged the onus placed on it u/s 68 of the IT act by submitting the gift deed. Proof of filing ITR, Bank statements, PAN, the address etc. The Hon'ble tribunal held that the revenue had all the information about the identity and the source of the funds, and the revenue could have proceeded against the said investor. The Hon'ble tribunal have relied upon the decision in case of Lovely exports private limited 319 ITR 5 (Supreme Court). The Hon'ble Supreme court in no uncertain terms has held that once the assessee has given the complete information about the investor and ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, he was of the view that source of income are not proved and the bank account of the donors are not furnished and does not know how much income the donor actually generated from the agricultural land. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds in its appeal: - "Ground No. 1 1.1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47 Mumbai ['the CIT(A)'], erred in upholding the additions made by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(1) ('the AO') amounting to Rs. 1,99,725/- and Rs. 2,55,000/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act") in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nate Bench has decided the issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Ushaben H. Ghadia v. DCIT in ITA.No. 618/Mum/2021 dated 23.03.2022. 6. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the orders passed by the lower authorities. 7. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe that assessee has received gift from Smt Bhanuben B. Patel and Smt Champaben Sojitra by submitting the bank statements, gift deed and other evidences in support of the receipts of the above said gifts which is placed in Paper Book. In the similar facts on record, we observe the Coordinate Bench has considered the similar issue in the case of Ushaben H. Ghadia v. DCIT (supra) and came to the conclusion, as under: - "7. I have heard both the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
