9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted on behalf of the Revenue. 3. In the assessee's appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- (1) The orders passed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, without proper reasons, invalid and bad in law. (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, both the ld. CIT(A) as well as the AO erred in having confirmed and added a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- received by way of gift from nine different persons whose identity, genuineness and creditworthiness were proved by adducing necessary evidence and affidavits to the effect. (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in having directed the AO to compute capital gain with reference to the value adopted by the Stamp Valuation Authority, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t having substantial capital had disbelieved the gift. 6. It was the submission that on appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals), the ld. CIT(Appeals) had directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the donors and notices had been sent by the Assessing Officer to the donors. Four of the donors had appeared before the Assessing Officer again and had reiterated their earlier stand. It was the submission that all the gifts were received by cheques. Consequently the genuineness of the transactions was proved. It was the further submission that the donors had themselves confirmed the transactions before the Assessing Officer and again in the remand proceedings when the appeal was pending before the ld. CIT(Appeals). These too reiterated the genuinen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not proved the reasons for the gifts. It was the further submission that human probabilities for an assessee who has high net worth individually to receive such gifts from persons of lesser net worth was against human probabilities. It was the further submission that in the statement recorded from the various donors, even though they had stated to have given the gifts and that the assessee is a family friend they did not even know the name of the wife of the assessee. Ld. D.R. vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals). In respect of the addition made under the head "drawings", ld. D.R. vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(Appeals). 9. We have considered the rival submissions. At the outset, a per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , we are of the view that the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) representing the gifts received by the assessee is liable to be deleted and we do so. 10. In regard to Ground No. 4, which is against the addition as confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on account of low drawings made by the assessee, it is noticed that the assessee is 71 years old person. He is staying with his son. No expenditure has been found in the hands of the assessee, which has remained unexplained. This being so, no ad hoc disallowance under the head "drawings" can be made in the hands of the assessee. In these circumstances, the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and as reduced by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on account of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
