Dr. Baldeep Singh,, Ludhiana v. DCIT,, Ludhiana

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D.K.SRIVASTAVA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUSHMA CHOWLA JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 255/CHD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2001-02 DR. BALDEEP SINGH VS. THE DCIT LUDHIANA CENTRAL CIRCLE-III LUDHIANA PAN NO. ACSPS8805P (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K.SAINI ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA JM THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-I LUDHIANA DATED 14.1.2010 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEA R 2001-02 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 158 A(B) R.W.S. 143(3) O F THE I.T. ACT 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL:- THAT ORDER PASSED U/S 250(6) BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO ARBITRARILY UPHOLD THE ADDITION OF RS. 70 000/- RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT AS A GIFT FROM HIS MOTHER SMT. RANJIT KAUR. 3. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRE SENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 70 000/- RECEIVED AS GI FT BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS MOTHER. 2 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THERE WAS A CREDIT OF RS. 70 000/- ON 11.8.2000 IN THE SAVING ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WITH UTI BANK. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD WAS THAT THE SAME WAS A GIF T RECEIVED FROM HIS MOTHER SMT. RANJIT KAUR. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED T O FILE CONFIRMATION IN THIS REGARD. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS MOTHER SMT. RANJIT KAUR HAD EXPIRED ON 20.10.2006 AND AS SUCH THE CONF IRMATION COULD NOT BE GIVEN. IT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED THAT DR. AMARDEEP SIN GH (HER SON) WAS MAINTAINING AND KEEPING HER RECORDS WAS ALSO NOT T RACEABLE AT THE MOMENT. THE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE ALONG WI TH THE COPY OF THE JOINT ACCOUNT OF SMT. RANJIT KAUR AND PARKASH KAUR FOR THE PERIOD 10.2.2001 TO 25.9.2001 WAS FILED. THE PAN NUMBER OF THE LADY WAS ALSO FILED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH ANY CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT AND THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 70 000/- WAS TREATE D AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ORDER O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FILE ANY GIFT DEED AND EVEN THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR WAS NOT PROVED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION CLAIMS TO HAVE RECEIVED A GIFT OF RS. 70 000/- FROM HIS MOTHER SMT.RANJIT KAU R WHO HAD EXPIRED ON 20.10.2006. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE INCOME TAX PARTICULARS OF THE DONOR HIS MOTHER BUT EXPRESSED HIS INABILITY TO FURNISH FURTHER DETAILS WITH REGARD TO THE BANK ACCOUNT EVIDENCING THE SOURCES OF THE AFORESAID GIF T OF RS. 70 000/-. HOWEVER COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT RELATING TO A LAT ER PERIOD WAS FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE SHOWED HIS INABILITY TO 3 PRODUCE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE IN THIS REGARD BECAU SE OF THE DEMISE OF HIS MOTHER AND NON AVAILABILITY OF HIS BROTHER WHO WAS KEEPING HER RECORDS. THE TRANSACTION WAS THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND A GIFT IN THE CASE HAD BEEN MADE BY THE MOTHER TO HER SON WHO IS THE ASSE SSEE BEFORE US. THE MOTHER WAS ASSESSED TO TAX AND BECAUSE OF THE DEMIS E OF THE DONOR MOTHER THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO FURNI SH THE BANK ACCOUNT. IN THE TOTALITY OF PRESENT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE BENEFIT OF THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE MERITS THE ACCEPTABILITY OF THE SOURCE OF CREDIT ENTRY OF RS. 70 000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING O FFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 70 000/-. HOWEVER THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE PRESENT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL NOT ACT AS A PRECEDEN T IN ANY OTHER CASE. THUS GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (D.K.SRIVASTAVA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 18 TH FEBRUARY 2011 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR