9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce the gifts were given by the close relatives, the essential ingredient of valid gift, that it should be out of natural love and affection has also been fulfilled. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) for deleting addition in respect of gifts and loan amount which were undisputedly not received during the year under consideration but was received in other years and also the three gifts received from the close relatives whose statements were recorded and were found to be persons of sufficient means by CIT(A). We also found that on the basis of information furnished before the lower authorities, Ishwar Dass who has given a gift was elder brother-in-law of assessee, who was found to be man of sufficient means for a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cell for particular year, the AO adopted 50 per cent cost in each of the asst. yrs. 1995-96 and 1996-97. The assessee was asked to furnish source of the amount invested in the construction of the house. The assessee furnished cash flow account for the period 1st April, 1992 to 31st March, 1993, 1st April, 1993 to 31st March, 1994 and upto 30th April, 1996. The AO observed that as per the cash flow statement for the period 1st April, 1992 to 31st March, 1994, the assessee has indicated receipt of gift of Rs. 2,10,000 from various persons and brought forward opening balance of Rs. 4,28,000. Opening balance was brought forward cash balance for the period 1st April, 1992 to 31st March, 1994. The AO further found that during the year 1992-93 th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,10,000 was received during the asst. yr. 1995-96 under consideration. He, therefore, held that amount received during the asst. yrs. 1993-94 and 1994-95 were not liable to be assessed during the asst. yr. 1995-96. He, therefore, deleted addition to the extent of Rs. 3,66,000 (Rs. 1,56,000 + Rs. 2,10,000). 5. In respect of amount of gifts of Rs. 2,10,000 received during the year under consideration, the CIT(A) observed that gifts were received by the assessee from close relatives either from the side of in-laws or brother of the assessee. He further found that AO has declined assessee's claim merely on the ground that income of the donors were below taxable limit and, therefore, they were not likely to make any gift. He further observed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zir Chand, father-in-law of assessee and Thakur Das, father of the assessee. As per the learned Authorised Representative, the assessee has discharged the primary onus caste on him with regard to identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of the donors. 9. On the other hand, it was submitted by learned Departmental Representative that assessee had failed to produce all the donors before the AO, therefore, he was justified in making addition on account of gifts. He further submitted that CIT(A) was not justified in deleting part of the gifts amount on the plea of pertaining to the earlier years, insofar as the affidavit and cash flow statement produced before the AO were rejected by him. 10. We have considered the rival contentions, carefull ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ipt as income of the year which actually pertains to some other years. The CIT(A), therefore, correctly deleted the addition in respect of part of the gifts and loans which was not pertaining to the year under consideration, and was received by the assessee in earlier years and was explained before the lower authorities vide his cash flow statement. In respect of three donors who were produced before the AO and whose statements were also recorded, the CIT(A) observed that all these persons have confirmed the factum of giving gifts and AO has not been able to bring on record any material to suspect the bona fides of statement of these persons. He further observed. that recording of statement by the AO was not merely a formality, and when the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulfilled. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) for deleting addition in respect of gifts and loan amount which were undisputedly not received during the year under consideration but was received in other years and also the three gifts received from the close relatives whose statements were recorded and were found to be persons of sufficient means by CIT(A). We also found that on the basis of information furnished before the lower authorities, Ishwar Dass who has given a gift of Rs. 30,000 was elder brother-in-law of assessee, who was found to be man of sufficient means for advancing gift of Rs. 30,000. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the CIT(A) for deleting the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
