9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee received a gift of Rs. 6 lakhs, while his wife, Smt. Manjit Kaur, received a gift of Rs. 12 lakhs. The assessee is a partner in M/s Hightensils Products India, M/s Godlight Industries and M/s Godex (India). A search was carried out in the case of M/s Hightensils Products India, on 11th Aug., 1995, as also the residential premises of the partners. It was noted from SB a/c No. 34802 maintained with Bank of Baroda, New Delhi, that a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs was credited on 21st July, 1992. The assessee claimed that the said sum was received as a gift from Shri Gurmit Singh of Singapore, by transfer from NRI a/c No. 50616 with Indian Overseas Bank, New Delhi. NRI account was said to have been opened by Shri Gurmit Singh from Singapore by transferring the documents through bank and remitting Rs. 1,000 by money transfer. First two entries dt. 4th May, 1992 and 7th May, 1992, were in respect of credit of Rs. 6,09,202 and Rs. 6,08,315, whereas the third entry dt. 7th May, 1992, was for Rs. 1,000. Details of NRI account are as under: Date Particulars Withdrawals Deposit Balance 4-5-1992 By transfer a/c opened — 6,09,202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee happened to be the Dharam sister of Gurmit Singh and thus Gurmit Singh made the gifts. AO noted that at the time of marriage of the assessee's son, the assessee had made a gift of Rs. 501 to Gurmit Singh and an equal amount to his wife Smt. Seema. No occasion for making the gifts was explained by the assessee. AO also relied on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Precision Finance (P) Ltd. (1994) 121 CTR (Cal) 20 : (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal). Ultimately, AO made the impugned additions in the hands of the assessee and his wife, summarising as under: (i) Only a sum of Rs. 1,000 was spent by Shri Gurmit Singh from Singapore for the purpose of opening the account in Indian Overseas Bank, Janpath, New Delhi; (ii) All other TTs/DDs have not been purchased by Shri Gurmit Singh. Instead, as per information supplied by the IOB, Singapore, Janpath, these TTs/DDs were purchased by one Shri TP Anand, having an address different from Shri Gurmit Singh; (iii) The information collected from the bank reveals that Shri Gurmit Singh has his account in IOB, Singapore. However, none of the TTs/DDs has been purchased out of that account. Instead, these TTs/DDs have been purchased in cash by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. 1990-91, genuineness was duly proved and no addition should be made. It was also submitted that in the case of Smt. Manjit Kaur in asst. yr. 1990-91, genuineness of gifts received from Shri Balwant Singh was accepted by the AO. Photocopy of passport of Shri Gurmit Singh was also filed to prove that when 9,500 USD was deposited, Gurmit Singh was in India, on 21st May, 1992. Photocopy of statutory declaration duly attested by the Notary Public at Singapore, was also filed. Ultimately, CIT(A) observed that the decision in the case of Lall Chand Kalra was distinguishable on facts because gifts to the assessee and his wife were from a stranger and there was nothing to show that the donor had any more important liability to meet than giving gifts to the assessee and his wife. He held the transactions to be genuine and there was no evidence with the Department that the assessee had converted his unaccounted money through gifts. Ultimately, he deleted the impugned additions. The Revenue is aggrieved. 3.2 Before us, learned Departmental Representative filed written submissions as under : "…The assessee, Shri Raghbir Singh, had shown that he had received gifts of Rs. 6 lakhs from Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e identity/capacity of the donor and the genuineness of the transactions. Degree of proof in the matter of gifts is heavier than cash credits. The assessee has furnished evidence regarding receipt of amounts of gifts from NRI account, which was opened by the donor only for the transactions of so-called gifts, as is apparent from copy of account filed in the paper book and extracted hereinabove. All the deposits made in the said account, except a sum of Rs. 2,79,775 (USD 9,500) have come through TTs/DDs purchased in Singapore by one Shri TP Anand, as certified by the IOB letter, extracted above. As per the bank's letter, TTs were purchased by a walk-in-customer, by paying cash. From the bank account, we find that there is no other transaction except gifts of Rs. 6 lakhs and Rs. 12 lakhs, given by the donor. The onus lies on the assessee to prove identity/capacity/creditworthiness of the donor and genuineness of the transactions. Creditworthiness of Shri Gurmit Singh could not be proved from the material on record, especially when the amounts sent through TTs, have been purchased by Anand, to which the bank has described to be a walk-in-customer, in cash. Until and unless all the thr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he electricity expenses. He asked for details of various expenses. AO noted that at the time of search, seven domestic servants were found to have been employed. Monthly expenses were estimated at Rs. 12,000 and, therefore, addition of Rs. 60,300 was made. Learned CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition by observing as under: "Taking into account the above facts, it is observed that the electricity expenses as also maintenance of house property, withdrawals shown by the assessee at Rs. 83,700 cannot be considered to be low, especially in the absence of any evidence to show that the assessee's family has incurred expenditure in excess of the withdrawals shown. It is also noted that the number of persons found at the time of search operation were not servants of the assessee but some of them were also employees of various concerns, who had come to collect keys of the factory/office premises and it is stated by the assessee that some of the persons are only part-time servants." Learned Departmental Representative did not point out any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order in deleting the addition of Rs. 60,300, neither any cogent evidence or material has been brought on fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
