9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 was transferred by the assessee on 14-6-1989 to the following persons : 1.Smt. P. Sarada Rs. 50,000 2.Kum. Darsana Rs. 50,000 3.Kum. Sunitha Rs. 50,000 The Assessing Officer found that in the statement of wealth the assessee has not shown any loan or liability of these three persons. The Assessing Officer was therefore of the opinion that the assessee had made a gift to the said three persons and notice was issued to the assessee. As per reply filed by the assessee to the Assessing Officer, the amounts, which were given by the assessee to the three ladies, were given to him by one Shri Ramachandra Panicker, who was a Government Contractor and also a very good family friend of the assessee. Smt. P. Sarada is the daughter of Shri Ramachandra Panicker, and Kum. Darsana and Kum. Sunitha were his grand-daughters. As the assessee was a close friend of Shri Panicker, Shri Panicker gave the said money to the assessee, to be handed over to his daughter Smt. P. Sarada as and when required by her for the construction of a residential house. As per the assessee, he paid the amount to Smt. Sarada as requested by her and no gift was involved in the said payment. The Assessing Officer ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing Officer ultimately taxed Rs. 1,50,000 as a gift under the Gift-tax Act by observing as under : "5. The fact which is proved clearly is that the assessee is a family friend of Shri Panicker, they know each other well. In the long association Shri Panicker also rendered good services to Shri Ramesan and this has been stated during the hearing on behalf of Shri Panicker by his son-in-law. To show his gratitude, love and affection Shri Ramesan deposited the amount in the name of daughter and grand-daughters of Shri Panicker. This is treated a gift for the following reasons : 1.There is no evidence adduced in support of the claim that Smt. Sarada had made a request for money from Shri Ramesan. 2.The claim that the money was given for house construction is not correct since the amount was deposited in F.D. and not in SB A/c or as cash. 3.There is very remote possibility that a father entrusts money to a third person to give it to his daughter on uncertain future dates. The reasons adduced are not satisfactory. 4.When the amount has been given equally to Smt. Sarada and her two daughters in fixed deposits which shows that Shri Ramesan has given the same out of love and affectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersons unrelated to him. It would suffice to say that there was a gift within the meaning of gift given in the Gift-tax Act. Therefore, I have no hesitation in holding that the Assessing Officer was right in bringing the same to tax. The grounds raised by the appellant are accordingly rejected." 6. We have heard the learned Counsel Shri T.N. Seetharaman, for the assessee and the ld. DR for the revenue. We have also carefully consi-dered the facts as per record before us. From the facts as put before us, it appears that the Assessing Officer initiated the proceedings under the Gift-tax Act after noticing that the assessee has issued three cheques totalling Rs. 1,50,000 from his S.B. Account No. 3001 with Dena Bank, Trivandrum on 14-6-1989 to Smt. Sarada and Kum. Darsana and Kum. Sunitha. From the facts on record it is clear that the assessee has no blood relation and any relation with Smt. Sarada and her two daughters. The Assessing Officer has stated that if it would have been the liability of the assessee, which was repaid to him, then the assessee would have disclosed the same in his wealth tax return at the liability side, but nothing was mentioned by the assessee in his return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edient of the gift is that there must be transfer by one person to another of any existing movable or immovable property which means that the property should belong to the assessee. Merely because the assessee has transferred the movable or immovable property to somebody else, that will not amount to transfer which is contemplated in the definition of gift. At least there must be some interest of the assessee in the said property. In this case, the assessee has filed the confirmation letter from Shri Panicker stating that he had entrusted the said cash to the assessee to be given to his daughter in future in case she requested for the same for construction of a house. So, in sum and substance, the assessee had denied any interest in the amount which was transferred by him. In fact, the primary burden was on the Assessing Officer to prove that the asset which was transferred by the assessee belonged to him when the assessee had produced the confirmation letter from Shri Ramachandra Panicker. The Assessing Officer had not even taken pains to examine Shri Panicker in the light of the confirmation letter issued by him. Moreover, it was also necessary for the Assessing Officer to examin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
