9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declaring total income of Rs. 24,32,335/-. The assessee filed a revised computation of income on 18.1.2007 declaring total income at Rs. 24,32,335/-. The notice was issued u/s. 148 of the Act and the assessment was reopened. The assessee vide letter dt. 14.11.2008 requested the AO to treat the revised income submitted on 18.1.2007 as return filed in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 3.1. A survey u/s. 133A of the Act was conducted on 28.6.2006 at the office premises of M/s. Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. It was found in the course of survey action that Shri Mukesh M. Choksi, Director of M/s. Mahasagar Securities Pvt. Ltd. was giving accommodation entries as per the requirements of his clients against receipt of cash and his commission. Accordingly, enquiries were conducted to trace out the actual beneficiaries who had taken the accommodation entires from Shri Mukesh M. Choksi. The assessee alongwith his father Shri Ratanchand Oswal & his mother Smt. Rasila R Oswal were found to have taken accommodation entries from Shri Mukesh M. Choksi. Accordingly, a survey action was also conducted on 28.12.2006 at the business premises of a company in which assessee is a Director a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs would be initiated. The assessee filed statement of gifts received during the year giving name and address of the donor alongwith cheque details, copies of all gifts deeds were furnished. 4.1. After considering the facts and the submissions and drawing support from the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs MAK Data Ltd. in ITA No. 415/2012 order dt. 22.1.2013, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the levy of penalty in respect of gifts involved. 5. Aggrieved by this, the assessee is before us. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee once again made submissions in the similar lines as were made before the lower authorities. The Ld. Counsel also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal Nagpur Bench in the case of ACIT Vs Malu7 Electrodes (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 271/Nag/2008, Bangalore Bench in the case of ITO Vs Intel Tech India (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 71/Bang/09 and on the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta Bench in the case of CIT Vs Suresh Chand Bansal IT Appeal No. 9 of 2009, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs Careers Education & Infotech Pvt. Ltd. 336 ITR 257. 7. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative strongly supported the findings of the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h other donors with regard to natural love & affection. Q.21 When the Identity of the Donors was not known to you nor are they related to you in any manner, please explain what was the motivation for the donors to gift such huge sums to you as well as members of your family as mentioned above. Ans. I don't want to make any comments in this regard. I am offering an amount of Rs. 103,050,000 being the sum covered by the gifts mentioned above as additional income of myself, my family members and two HUFs as per working furnished to you. Revised returns for the relevant years will be filed and taxes paid accordingly. Q.23 Do you wish to say anything more? Ans. As already stated above, I am declaring the following amounts as additional income over and above the income already declared by me, my family members and two HUFs. Year-wise and person-wise break-up of income has already been furnished to you. I. On Account of claim of long term capital gain Rs. 7,90,88,462/- II. On Account of Gifts received from various Parties Rs. 103,050,000/- Rs. 18,21,38,462/- As I have volunteered to file revised ROl and pay taxes I earnestly plead that no penal proceedings be initiated against me, m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a). Considering all these facts in totality, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. ITA No. 3332/M/2013 - A.Y. 2003-04- Assessee's appeal 13. The assessee and the Revenue are in appeal against the very same order of the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee is aggrieved by the levy of penalty of Rs. 20,00,000/- in respect of gifts received from various parties. 14. Facts and issues are identical to the facts considered by us in detail in ITA No. 3331/M/2013 for A.Y. 2002-03 except that during this year the assessee has received Rs. 20 lakhs as gifts. However, only Rs. 3 lakhs has been offered by the assessee as income from other sources in the return of income. Therefore, the AO has added the balance amount and treated the same as income from other sources. Facts and issues are identical to the facts in ITA No. 3331 /M/2013 for A.Y. 2002-03. For our detailed reason given in the aforementioned appeal and on finding the facts in issues in this appeal to be identical, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. ITA No. 3398/M/13 - A.Y. 2003-04 - Revenue's appeal 15. Facts and issues are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
