ACIT, Jhansi v. Shri Akshay Gaur, Mathura

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH AGRA BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI P.K. BANSAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.672/AGR/2008 ASST. YEAR: 2003-04 ASTT. C.I.T. 6 JHANSI. VS. SHRI AKSHAY GAUR 71 CIVIL LINES JHANSI. (PAN : NOT MENTIONED) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.C. SHARMA JR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NAVIN GARGH ADVOCATE ORDER PER R.K. GUPTA J.M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORD ER OF CIT(A) RELATING TO A.Y. 2003- 04. 2. THE DEPARTMENT IS OBJECTING DELETING THE ADDITIO N OF RS.10 00 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF GIFTS OF RS.5 00 000/- EACH RECEIVED FROM SHRI BEER SINGH AN D SHRI DAYA KISHAN GUPTA BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A.O.) NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN IN HAVING RECEIVED GIFT OF RS.10 00 000/- FROM TWO PERSONS I.E. RS.5 00 000/- FROM SHRI BEER SINGH & RS.5 00 000/- FROM SHRI DAYA KISHAN GUPTA. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT BY FILING EV IDENCES AND BY PRODUCING THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES FROM WHOM THE GIFTS WERE RECEIVED. AFFIDAVITS OF T HE PARTIES ADMITTING HAVING GIVEN GIFTS TO THE 2 ASSESSEE WERE FILED. HOWEVER THESE PERSONS COULD NOT BE PRODUCED. SUMMONS UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAF TER) WERE ALSO ISSUED BY THE A.O. SUMMONS WERE RECEIVED BACK. THEREAFTER THE I.T.O. DEPUTED THE WARD INSPECTOR TO VISIT THE PREMISES OF THE DONORS I.E. SHRI BEER SINGH AND SHRI DAYA KISHA N GUPTA. STATEMENT OF SHRI DAYA KISHAN GUPTA WAS RECORDED. SHRI DAYA KISHAN GUPTA HAD ADM ITTED IN HAVING GIVEN GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE DETAILS OF INCOME TAX ASSESSMENTS WERE ALSO GIV EN BY SHRI DAYA KISHAN GUPTA. SIMILARLY STATEMENT OF SHRI BEER SINGH WAS ALSO RECORDED BY T HE INSPECTOR WHO ALSO ADMITTED IN HAVING GIVEN GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE DETAILS OF INCOME TAX RECORDS WERE ALSO GIVEN BY HIM. AFTER EXAMINING THESE DETAILS THE A.O. FOUND THAT THESE PERSONS ARE NOT HAVING CAPACITY TO MAKE THE GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE HE DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.10 00 000/-. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFO RE THE CIT(A). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT IN RESPECT OF GENUINENESS OF THE SAID GIFTS AFFIDAVIT BANK ACCOUNT INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT COPIES BALANCE SHEET ETC. FROM DONORS HAVE BEEN FILED BEFO RE THE A.O. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. HAD MADE INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION THROUGH INSP ECTOR DEPUTED FOR THE PURPOSE WHEREIN THE DONORS HAVE CONFIRMED THE GIFTS AND HAD EXPLAINED I TS SOURCES. IT WAS STATED THAT THE A.O. HAD MERELY MADE ADDITION ON THE BASIS OF SUSPICION AND HELD THAT THE GIFTS ARE GENUINE WITHOUT ANY ADVERSE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITT ED THAT EACH AND EVERY DETAILS ALONG WITH CONFIRMATIONS WERE FILED. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON T HE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PADAM SINGH CHOUHAN 215 CTR 303 (RAJ.) AND ON THE DECISI ON OF AGRA BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI ISHWAR LAL MOHANAI DECIDED IN ITA NO.1 81/AGR/2002 DATED 19.08.2004 WHEREIN ON SIMILAR FACTS THE ADDITION WAS DELETED BY THE TRIBU NAL. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THE CIT(A) OBSERVE D THAT THE ONUS LAID UPON THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DULY DISCHARGED AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ALL THE DETAILS. THE CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE A.O. HIMSELF MADE ENQUIRIES THROUGH HIS INSPECT OR WHEREIN THE DONOR HAD CONFIRMED THE GIFT 3 AND EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF GIFT. THEREFORE IT WA S HELD THAT THE A.O. WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. WERE DELETED. 4. NOW THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL 5. LD. D.R. PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER . ON THE OTHER HAND LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) . AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDERS OF THE A.O. AND THE CIT(A) WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A). THE CIT(A) HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THAT ALL THE DETAILS REQUIRED FOR PRO VING THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE FILED. THE A.O. HAS DEPUTED THE WARD INSPECTOR WHO RECORDED THE STATEMENT OF BOTH THE DONORS BY WHICH BOTH THE DONORS HAVE ACCEP TED IN HAVING GIVEN GIFTS TO THE ASSESSEE. SOURCE OF GIFT WAS ALSO EXPLAINED. BOTH THE DONORS ARE ASSESSED TO TAX REGULARLY. THEREFORE THERE WAS NO MATERIAL BEFORE THE A.O. TO HOLD THAT THE GIFTS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE. WITHOUT BRINGING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD NOT ACCEPTING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AT THE EN D OF THE A.O. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WE HOLD THAT THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIE D IN ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF HE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY WE CONFIRM HIS ORDER. 6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMI SSED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.05 .2010). SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (R.K. GUPA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: AGRA DATE: 24 TH MAY 2010. 4 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT BY ORDER 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT (APPEALS) CONCERNED 5. DR ITAT AGRA BENCH AGRA 6. GUARD FILE ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA TRUE COPY