9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 1279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sumed that he being a heart specialist had a consulting hours of 2 to 3 hours per day. He attended six patients per day. His receipt per day comes to Rs. 240. By taking 25 working days even then his monthly receipts come to Rs. 6,000. The assessee was out of India for about a month. Therefore the Assessing Officer estimated the net income from profession at Rs. 70,000 as against Rs. 42,000 disclosed by the assessee and thus made an addition of Rs. 28,000. After having considered the facts of the case, the CIT(A) deleted this addition on the basis of the list of patients produced before her along with the amounts of fees charged from them and also looking to the past history of the case. 3. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the submissions made b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... having considered the facts of the case and the case laws on the subject the CIT(A) held that the assessee had received the gift of Rs. 85,000 and it was not taxable at all on the ground that a detailed letter written by Doctor Ronald Theims, Chairman of the Society for Health and Medicine of West Germany had been filed to show that it was a gift and also a copy of the telegram received by the assessee asking him to visit West Germany for receiving the gift was filed. The Assessing Officer had not taken into consideration these evidences. 7. The ld. D.R. relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 8. The ld. A.R. submitted that the case of the assessee was fully covered by the following judgments: ( i ) CIT v. Ramdeo Sama ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal services rendered but out of personal regard and admiration he was given a gift of Rs. 85,000. Therefore, we decline to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). 11. Ground No. 3 is regarding deletion of addition of Rs. 25,000 being unexplained four expenses. The assessee had incurred an expenditure of Rs. 25,000 as visit to German. The Assessing Officer held that the expenditure incurred for the visit to Germany was not out of disclosed income and since the income from private practice had been estimated at Rs. 70,000 it was held to cover the unexplained expenditure of Rs. 25,000. The CIT(A) observed that the copy of the letter addressed to the Assessing Officer ????? to the source for meeting the expenditure was enclosed as annexure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... borne out of salary savings and household expenses was accepted by the CIT(A). The remaining expenditure of Rs. 8,000 is accepted as having given from the cash in hand. 12. The ld. D.R. relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 13. The ld. A.R. submitted that there was a categorical confirmation by the sister of the assessee wherein she not only confirmed the fact of buying tickets for him but also explained the source thereof, this vital fact had not been controverted by the Assessing Officer. The law is settled that what is apparent is real and the person who says that what is apparent is not real has to prove (ref.) Daulat Ram Rawatmull ( supra ). Otherwise also the onus under section 69C lay upon the revenue to establish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
