9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in question is exempt u/s.10(2) of the Act. We find no merit in the instant alternative plea as well since a gift sum which is not allowable under the relevant specific clause cannot be accepted to be an exempt income u/s.10(2) of the Act. We thus treat instant latter plea to be mainly technical in nature devoid of merit. - ITA No. 1072/Ahd/2016 - - - Dated:- 21-2-2018 - SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Rajesh C. Shah, A.R. For The Revenue : Shri V. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This assessee s appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arises against the CIT(A)-4, Ahmedabad s order dated 14.03.2016, in case no. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reliance on coordinate bench decision in Vineetkumar Raghavjibhai Bhalodia vs. ITO (2011) 140 TTJ (Rajkot) 58 accepting the similar gift in case of individual from HUF stood rejected as per legislative amendments in the above statutory provision. All this led to the impugned addition being made in assessee s hands. 3. The CIT(A) confirms Assessing Officer s action as under: 7.1 As mentioned in the assessment order, the appellant has shown gift of ₹ 1,02,00,000/- from his own HUF i.e. Gyanchand Mulchand Bardia (HUF). The AO stated in the assessment order that HUF cannot give gift to the member of the HUF, therefore, AO assessed the income under the head income from other sources. The appellant contended that as per amended p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be donee. Donee should expressly given consent accepting the gift in the gift deed. There is no such document produced by the appellant. 7.4 Regarding the case laws relied upon by the appellant, the case laws pertain to the period before the amendment brought to the provisions related to gift from member to HUF considered as exempt from tax. Therefore, with due respect to the higher judicial authority, the case law cited by the appellant is not found relevant to the appellant's case. Therefore, it is not relied upon. 7.5 As discussed above, the additions made by the AO by rejecting the claim of the appellant and treating income under the head income from other sources is found justified, hence confirmed. This ground of app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... teev V. Gala in ITA NO.1906/Mum/2014 dated April 19, 2017. He therefore seeks acceptance of instant appeal. 5. Mr. Shah s latter contention as per assesse s pleadings is that both the lower authorities have not decided his alternative submission to be covered u/s.10(2) of the Act. Learned counsel is fair enough in not pressing for assessee s third substantive ground seeking interest deduction of ₹ 5,819/- claimed u/s. 57(iii) of the Act. 6. Learned Departmental Representative appearing at Revenue s behest strongly supports both the lower authorities findings adding assessee s alleged gift amount of ₹ 1,02,00,000/- received from his HUF. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival submissions. Case file perus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact that the former category in clause (i) of (e) defining a relative qua an individual recipient does not include an HUF as a donor. The legislature has incorporated clause (ii) therein to deal with an instance of an HUF donee only receiving gifts from its members. We refer to Board s circular no. 1/2011 r.w. explanatory circular for Finance Act, 2009, makes it clear in latter s clause no.24.2 that Section 56(ii) is an anti-abuse provision. We also quote hon ble apex cout s judgment in CIT v. Sodra Devi [1957] 32 ITR 615 (SC), Smt. Tarulata Shyam v. CIT (1977) 108 ITR 345 (SC) and Keshavji Ravji Co. v. CIT (1990) 183 ITR 1 (SC) to observe that principles of literal interpretation in respect of the relevant context vis- -vis the legisl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
