9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition amounting to ₹ 10,00,000/- made by the AO by considering the gifts as non-genuine and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. Addition of expenses incurred for operating Chandanvan Tiny Tots School - Held that:- Carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that the assessee was depositing receipts from tuition in her bank account maintained with Punjab National Bank in the name of Chandanvan Tiny Tots School and also had shown withdrawals, so it cannot be said that only deposits were there in the bank account as alleged by the AO. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee had shown the net income amounting to ₹ 1,20,000/- on account of tuition fee. In the present case, the assessee deposited the entire tuition fee in her bank account withdrew the amount to meet out the expenses from the said bank account and had shown net income from tuition in the profit & loss account. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of ₹ 80,298/- was not justified and therefore, the same is deleted. - ITA No. 4618/Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 2-1-2017 - Sh. N. K. Saini, A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce of the assessee relates to the confirmation of addition of ₹ 10,00,000/- out of the addition of ₹ 15,99,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 4. The facts related to this issue in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 31.03.2010 declaring an income of ₹ 1,86,040/- which was processed on 06.09.2010. Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny on the basis of AIR information of cash deposited in bank account amounting to ₹ 15,99,000/-. The AO asked the assessee to explain the source of cash deposited amounting to ₹ 15,99,000/- in ICICI Bank Ltd., New Delhi. The assessee submitted that the following gifts were received from the relatives: Name Relation Amount Date 1. Sh. Omkar Singh Father-in-law 2,50,000 27.01.2009 2. Sh. Dharmaveer Singh Father 5,00,000 29.01.2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12.09.2008 10,570/- 14.10.2008 10,570/- 10.11.2008 10,570/- 05.12.2008 11,570/- 07.01.2008 13,570/- 06.02.2009 13,570/- 05.03.2009 15,182/- 1,38,452/- This shows that she has earned salary to the extent of ₹ 1,38,452/-. All the salary payment has been received and accounted for in the bank prior to withdrawal. She has deposited cash in her bank account. The amount was withdrawn (cash) on 10.09.2008 ₹ 1,50,000/- and ₹ 2,00,000/- on 04.10.2008 whereas as per gift deed, it is mentioned that gift was given on 12/12/2008. Even no nexus to the withdrawal and gift has been proved. Moreover, when a bank account is being maintained, she could give a gift by way of a/c payee cheque. These facts show that the non genuineness of gift. Under the circumstances, gift of ₹ 3,50,000/- is added back to the income of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... By cash 23.03.2009 17391 3,00,000.00 Dr Cash paid: self 31.03.2009 1,99,000.00 Cr By cash 7. It was submitted that the cash deposits of ₹ 2,00,000/- each on 19.03.2009 and 21.03.2009 were out of cash withdrawals of ₹ 5,00,000/- on 26.02.2009 and similarly cash deposits of ₹ 1,99,000/- was out of the cash withdrawals of ₹ 3,00,000/- on 23.03.2009, however, the AO added ₹ 5,99,000/- in the assessment order, in spite of the assessee s submission that those were out of cash withdrawals from earlier date, on the ground that no evidence was submitted by the assessee to substantiate the contention. 8. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the assessee had withdrawn ₹ 5,00,000/- on 26.02.2009 and ₹ 3,00,000/- on 23.03.2009. Therefore, the preponderance of probabilities was in the favour of the assessee. Accordingly, addition of ₹ 5,99,000/- was deleted. 9. As regards to the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmation of gift and explained the source for making the gift. It was contended that father-in-law of the assessee was assessed to tax and her father was retired as Colonel from Indian Army and had given gift to the assessee amounting to ₹ 5,00,000/- which was sufficient to make the deposits in the bank. It was further submitted that the assessee furnished the affidavit of the donors contents of which were not controverted. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. It was further submitted that there can be no occasion for gift from the relatives. The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Suresh Kumar Kakar (2010) 324 ITR 231. 11. In his rival submissions the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee did not disclose the occasion of gift and had not fully explained the source for making the gift. Therefore, the addition was rightly made by the AO considering the gifts as non-genuine and the ld. CIT(A) was fully justified in confirming the addition. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: Raje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was not feeling well and died on 04.01.2009 and that he had given a cash amount gift of ₹ 5,00,000/- to his sister Smt. Sunita before his death. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the present case as discussed hereinabove, I am of the view that the assessee duly explained the source of the gifts received from her sister, father-in-law and father. Therefore, the addition amounting to ₹ 10,00,000/- made by the AO by considering the gifts as non-genuine and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was not justified. Accordingly, the same is deleted. 13. The another issue vide Ground No. 3 relates to the confirmation of addition of ₹ 80,298/- sustained by the ld. CIT(A) being expenses incurred for operating Chandanvan Tiny Tots School. 14. The facts related to this issue in brief are that the AO during the assessment proceedings noticed that the assessee filed bank statement of Chandanvan Tiny Tots School maintained with PNB, Mathura wherein cash had been deposited amounting to ₹ 2,00,298/- and nothing was debited. He further observed that no income from Chandanvan Tiny Tots School had been declared. He, therefore, considered the cash deposits of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
