9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (2) TMI 122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ef compass and the same would be of assistance for adjudicating the issue. The assessee had gifted a sum of Rs. 5,000 to his son Shri Brish Bhan and had filed the return under the GT Act in the status of HUF for the said amount. Brish Bhan got a 'nohra' (cowshed) valued at Rs. 8,000 and his wife Mrs. Santosh Kumari got one half share in shop No. 64, New Mandi, Kallanwali, valued at Rs. 18,000 as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue before us. The ld. Deptl. Rep. Shri R.S. Khichi vehemently argued that merely because an amount has been subjected to wealth-tax in the hands of the donor could not be a reason for the AAC to delete the addition in respect of this property from the gift-tax assessment but he could not controvert the fact that the status in which the gift tax return was filed was that of HUF and it was as a cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his reliance on the case of Narendra Kumar J. Modi vs. CIT 1976 CTR (SC) 286: (1976) 105 ITR 109 (SC). 7. After taking into consideration the rival submission, we do not find any controversy about the following facts: (i) The assessee had filed the Gift tax return in the status of HUF: (ii) The assessee had shown a gift of Rs.5,000 which he gave in cash to his son Brish Bhan and with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the assessee though was not in cross appeal but as a respondent could certainly support the finding of the AAC on contentions not newly raised before us but which were before the lower authorities. The reliance of the ld. Deptl. Rep. on the case of Narendrakumar J. Modi is misplaced on the basis of facts of this case and it will also not serve any purpose to go to the provisions of s. 4(v) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
