9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 924X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l towards his credit in India. The assessee s brother is also filing returns in India on the profits from firms and other incomes earned in India. As seen from the bank account furnished the assessee has large amount of credit as opening balance which was ignored by the A.O. in coming to the conclusion that the credits are only to the extent of US$16,500/- whereas the gift was to the extent of US $35,000. The opening credit of the month itself was about US $27,466. In view of these facts, we are of the opinion that the donor has creditworthiness to gift the amount to his brother and accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. - Shri R.V. Easwar, Senior Vice-President and Shri B. Ramak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the addition by stating as under: - 1.3 I have perused the assessment order, written submissions and the case laws cited by the appellant. Section 68 of the Act has been in the Income-tax Act since 1961 and has not undergone any amendment so far. It has generated a number of case laws at the Hon'ble High Courts as well as Supreme Court levels. A distillation of the precedents yields the following propositions of law in the context of Section 68 of the Act. The assessee has to prima facie prove (a) the identity of the creditor / donor, (b) the genuineness of the transaction namely where it has been transmitted through banking or other indisputable channels, (c) the credit worthiness or financial strength of the creditor / donor and (d) r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reditworthiness of the donor in USA the evidences furnished by the assessee cannot be accepted. 5. The learned counsel referred to various submission made before the CIT(A) and further submitted that the A.O. was not correct in invoking the provisions of section 68 whereas provisions of section 56(2) are applicable for the assessment year under consideration and since the gift was received from the brother of the assessee the above amount gets excluded under section 56 (2) and so provisions of section 68 are not applicable. 6. We have considered the issue. Without going into the legalities of the addition made by the A.O. under section 68, we are of the opinion that there was no case for treating the gift received by the assessee from his b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
