9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct that both the persons have confirmed the gifts and were having independent sources of income. Kindly delete the addition of Rs. 3,50,000/-. 3. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 1,24,300/- introduced as initial capital by the appellate without appreciating that availability such a small cash in houses of Indian citizens has even recognized by the CBDT New Delhi. 4. The ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 60,19,000/- made by invoking provisions of section 40A(3) without considering that appellant was simply a bill collecting agent of Reliance Communications and that amount had not been claimed as expenditure in profit and loss account." 2. Ground No. 1 is of general nature and does not require separate adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... drawn from Indian Overseas Bank, Moga. 4. The Assessing Officer analyzed the data furnished and the contents of the statement and observed that assessee's brother, Pradeep Matkan who is stated to have given a gift, does not have credible sources. He is not income-tax assessee as he has filed return long back. His meager income is less than Rs. 1.00 lakh per annum. Therefore, it was not possible to accept the gift. Credit worthiness of the donor is not proved. Accordingly the same was added to the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act as non-genuine gift. In respect of other gift the Assessing Officer made further enquiries from the banks and it was found that Smt. Swaran Kanta had a saving bank account No. 10445 with Indian Overseas Ban ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bove savings. As far as the gift of Smt. Swaran Kanta is concerned who is mother-in-law of the assessee who was employed as Lecturer and has got retirement benefits and the gift has been made out of these funds. The very fact that she can make FDR and purchase a plot, shows that she has the capacity to make the gift. 7. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue submitted that the brother of the assessee has a very meager amount of income which is less than Rs. 1.00 lakh. He has not filed income-tax returns for the last 10 years. After meeting his household expenses, the assessee can not possibly be save anything to make a huge gift of 1.00 lakh to 1.50 lakh to his sister. As far as the gift by Smt. Swaran Kanta is concerned, the gift w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er on in May, 2007 a sum of Rs. 2.00 lakhs was transferred which was found to have been used for making fixed deposit (STDR). Further a sum of Rs. 10,000/- lakh and Rs. 1.90 lakh was withdrawn in September and November, 2007 which was used for the purchase of plot. Thus the behavior of Smt. Swaran Kanta clearly shows that she has been investing her money prudently and keeping the same in the bank. When no cash has been withdrawn how she could have made a gift of Rs. 2.00 lakhs. In any case, an educated person like a Lecturer having a bank account would not have made gift in the form of cash. Applying the test of human probabilities as enunciated in the case of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal V. CIT, 214 ITR 801(S.C) it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umulated over a period of time. This money was invested in business. 11. On the other hand, ld. DR for the revenue strongly supported the order of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that why a person such as the assessee who is highly qualified would keep the cash at home Moreover, against tuition income no expenses have been shown on account of household expenses or personal withdrawals. Therefore, the addition was justified. 12. After considering rival submissions, we are of the opinion that the ld. CIT(A) has correctly disbelieved the story of accumulation of cash which has been made by the assessee just to explain the introduction of cash. If the assessee was really rendering tuition the money would have been deposited in the bank or at least s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as only an agent of RCIL therefore, money collected on behalf of RCIL and deposited in the bank account would not attract the provisions of section 40A(3)and in this regard reliance was placed on the decision of Cochin Bench of the Tribunal in the case of S. Rahumathulla V. ACIT, 127 ITD 440 (Cochin) and Koottummal Groups V. ITO, 133 ITR 335 (Cochin). 15. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue strongly supported the order of Assessing Officer. 16. After considering the rival submissions, we find that the issue before us is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of Koottummal Groups V. ITO, 133 ITR 335 (Cochin) wherein also the assessee was an agent of RCIL only. The head noted in that case reads as under: "Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
