9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (11) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce the facts. As a consequence of the search and seizure operation conducted by the officers of the Income-tax Department on October 31, 1996, under section 132(1) of the Act at the residential premises (house No. 315, Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt.) jointly occupied by Shri Mahesh Kumar Singal and Shri Harish Kumar Singal, the Assessing Officer, vide order dated October 31, 1997, computed the assessee's undisclosed income to the tune of Rs. 4,65,635 for the block period from April 1, 1986 to October 31, 1996. The appeal filed by the assessee was partly allowed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench "B" (for short, "the Tribunal"). Feeling dissatisfied, the appellant has filed this appeal questioning the following two additions sustained by the Tribunal: "(a) Rs. 2,01,000 on account of non-genuine gift having been received from one Shri Kala Chauhan of Village Chanaru, District Patiala, a non-resident Indian; (b) Rs. 89,500 on account of difference in the value of plot." Ms. Manisha Gandhi, learned counsel for the appellant-assessee argued that the addition of Rs. 2,01,000 made by the Assessing Officer is legally unsustainable because that amount was received by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the respective arguments and perused the record. Paragraphs 57 to 62 of the Tribunal's order, which contain detailed discussion on the issue of addition of Rs. 2,01,000 made by the Assessing Officer, read as under: "57. We have considered the rival submissions as also the material on record to which our attention was invited during the course of the hearing. The decisions cited at the Bar have also been taken into account. In the present appeal, we do not propose to go into the question whether gifts can be exchanged between strangers or there has to be an occasion for giving the gifts, inasmuch as we propose to decide the matter on the merits based primarily on the test of human probabilities. As regards the legal aspect of the matter there are decisions of the Tribunals and the courts both ways but each of these has been delivered on its own facts. 58. In the present case, the assessee has rested his entire case on the filing of affidavit by the learned donor and the amount having come out of his NRE account in India and there being no possibility of producing the person for examination by the Assessing Officer. These three facts may be relevant in a given case and may even l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see's brother was constructing a house. In other words, there is a purpose and reason stated for the alleged gift whereas a gift is normally given out of love and affection. 61. It is also noted from the assessment order that prior to going to Austria, Sh. Kala Chauhan worked at a brick kiln in his village and not only was he a man of modest means prior to going abroad but even thereafter. 62. Much has been argued before us that the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act under which the addition has been made, have not been spelt out and sections 68 to 69A are not applicable, but in our opinion section 69 without being specifically mentioned stands attracted as the amount obviously has found its way to the bank account of the assessee from where it has been advanced to Sh. Mahesh Singal, the assessee's brother purportedly for the construction of his house. The non-mentioning of the relevant section, in our opinion is not fatal. It is also noted from the statement of the assessee's total income for the assessment year 1995-96 being the year in which the alleged gift was received, nothing has been mentioned by way of a note and in fact it cannot be the assessee's argument that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by learned counsel for the appellant has got any parallel with the case before us, Therefore, the same cannot be made the basis for deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer which, as mentioned above, was upheld by the Tribunal. On the issue of addition of Rs. 89,500 towards the value of the plot, the Tribunal, in paragraph 39 of its order, observed as under: "39. After examining the rival submissions, we are of the view that there is no merit in the submissions made by learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellant. Much has been argued about the state of mind of the assessee at the time of search but we have perused the statement recorded, wherein the assessee has categorically mentioned the amount of Rs. 1.65 lakhs as also the year, i.e., 1987. Nothing emerges from the record about any confusion in the mind of the assessee or for that matter any coercion or pressure on the part of the tax authorities. Even while arguing the other grounds in the appeal, learned senior counsel has not referred to the disturbed state of mind and each of the additions made has been contested on the merits by the parties. The clinching fact, however, is that in the case of assessee's b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
