9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 496X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onus casts upon her to establish the source of gifts and credit worthiness of the donors. Genuineness of gift held by appellate authorities. Both the findings being pure findings of fact are not alleged to be perverse. Consequently no substantial question of law arises - Decided against Revenue - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1026 OF 2010 - - - Dated:- 24-7-2012 - S.J.VAZIFDAR M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ. Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Appellant. Mr. Subhash Shetty for the Respondent. JUDGMENT ( PER M.S. SANKLECHA, J.): This appeal by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) is filed against the order dated 27/3/2008 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... showing the property Candy house valued at Rs.80.00 lacs while the respondent assessee had shown the purchase price of the property at Candy house for a consideration of Rs.71.35 lacs. Consequent to the above, while passing an assessment order for the block period the Assessing officer treated the difference between Rs.80.00 lacs and Rs.71.35 lacs of Rs.8.65 lacs as undisclosed income of the assessee for the assessment year 2003-04 and sought to tax the same. The CIT (Appeals) by an order dated 18/8/2005 allowed the appeal of the respondent-assessee and held that the amount of Rs.8.65 lacs cannot be held to be undisclosed income of the respondent as amount of Rs.80.00 lacs shown in respect of the flat at Candy House was for the purpose of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esale value of the premises at Candy House and the same was noted by her father as a rough measure for the division of property and the family assets in the family. The appellant-revenue has not been able to bring on record other evidence in support of its contention that the amount in excess of Rs.7.35 lacs was paid for the purchase of Candy House property. The document found during the search at the respondentassessee's premises in the handwriting of the respondent's father has been explained satisfactorily viz. that it is the resale value of the property and the figures were recorded only for the purpose of distribution of the property within the family. The aforesaid findings are pure findings of fact and the Commissioner of Income tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... far as balance-sheet and capital gain accounts are concerned, it was pointed out the same were taken by the department during the search of the respondent's premises. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was of the view that the appellant had reasonably discharged the onus to prove the genuineness of the gift transaction and the same cannot be doubted without bringing on record material evidence to prove that gift transactions were paper transactions. Therefore, the appeal of the respondent-assessee was allowed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 7) On appeal by the revenue, the Tribunal by order dated 28/3/2008 upheld the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). 8) Mr. Vimal Gupta, Advocate for the revenue submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
