Sri Biswanath Palchowdhury, Burdwan V. I.T.O Wd - 2(2),Burdwan, Burdwan

ITA 1090/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 109023514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY CIT LD
• Assessee Lawyers: SOUMITRA CHOUDHURY LD
• Keywords: Gift; Bogus loan
• Section: 234B; 131; 6; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , SMC BENCH, KOLKATA [BEFORE HON BLE SHRI B.P.JAIN , AM ] I.T.A NO S . 1090 & 1091 /KOL/2013 A.Y S : 200 3 - 2004 & 2004 - 05 SRI BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY VS. I.T.O WARD 2(2), BURDWAN PAN:AKCP P4454H ( APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT ) FOR THE APPELLANT: S HRI SOUMITRA CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATE, LD.AR FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI SANJAY, ADDL.CIT, LD.DR DATE OF HEARING: 0 3 - 06 - 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 0 3 - 06 - 2015 ORDER TH ESE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE ARISE FROM THE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A) - DURGAPUR ALL DATED 18 - 02 - 2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04 AND 2004 - 05. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN BOTH THE APPEALS OF T HE ASSESSEE ARE COMMON, THE Y WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND THEREFORE, THE SE ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.1090/KOL/2013 FOR THE A.Y 2003 - 04 (BY THE ASSESSEE) : 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 2. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS COMPLETELY WRONG IN NOT QUASHING THE REOPENING PROCEEDING U/S.147/143(3) OF THE I.T ACT WHICH IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 3. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS WRONG IN DITTOING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.220,000/ - AS UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN KVP WHICH IS COMPLE TELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 4. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WRONG IN NOT ACCEPTING THE FACT THAT THE SAID KVP WERE ACQUIRED AND IN THE NAME OF HIS GRANDMOTHER, THE APPELLANT IS ONLY THE SECOND JOINT HOLDER, THEREFORE, THE WHOLE ADDITION IS RS.220,000/ - IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 5. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS WRONG IN DITTOING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.60,000/ - AS UNSECURED LOAN WHICH IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 6. FOR THAT THE INTEREST U/S. 234B CHARGED MECHANICALLY IS WRONG & ILLEGAL. 7. FOR THAT THE APPELLANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADDUCE ANY FURTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS, IF NECESSARY, AT OR BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. GROUND NOS. 1 & 7 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. THEREFORE, THE SAME REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. 3. THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS GROUND NO.2. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 2 ITA NO S . 1090 & 1091/KOL/2013 SMC - BP SH. BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY 4. GROUND NO.6 WITH REGARD TO CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S. 234B O F THE ACT IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. THEREFORE, THE SAME REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. 5. G ROUND NOS. 3 & 4 OF THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL RELATE TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.2,20,000/ - BEING UNDISCLOSED INVESTMENT IN KVPS. 6. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A CASH CREDIT LOAN OF RS.2.20 LAKH SANCTIONED AGAINST SECURITY DEPOSIT OF 22 NOS. OF KVP AT A DENOMINATION OF RS.10,000/ - EACH AS PER DETAILS AVAILABLE AT PAGES 1 - 2 OF THE AO S ORDER. BUT THE SAME INVESTMENT HAS NOT BEEN REFLECT ED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE PRODUCED AND THOSE WERE EXAMINED. COPY OF KVPS HAS BEEN FURNISHED. IT IS FOUND BY HIM THAT THE SAID KVPS ARE IN THE NAME OF ASHALATA PA LCHOWDHURY AND BISHWANATH PALCHOWDHURY. BEFORE THE AO THE LD. COUNSEL HAS STATED THAT ASHALA PALCHOWDHURY IS THE GRANDMOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. SHE IS A HOUSE WIFE. THE LD. COUNSEL FURNISHED A WRITTEN STATEMENT SIGNED BY THE ASSESSEE MENTIONING THAT THE KVPS WERE P URCHASED BY HIS GRANDMOTHER, ASHALATA PALCHOWDHURY OUT OF THE PAST SAVINGS AND FUND COLLECTED FROM HER HUSBAND, NIROD BARAN PALCHOWDHURY . IT IS STATED THAT HIS NAME HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE KVPS ONLY FOR OPERATING THE SAME. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED AN OTHER SUBMISSION SIGNED BY UTTAM PALCHOWDHURY, SAGANIKA KUNDU, NARAYAN PALCHOWDHURY, SARDHYA GHOSAL, PURNA CHANDRA PALCHOWDHURY, SOMA PALCHOWDHURY, WHO CLAIMED TO BE THE OWNER OF THE SAID KVPS. MOREOVER, IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY HAS N O RIGHT TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE SAID KVPS. THE AO CONSIDERED THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS , BUT NOT ACCEPTED IN ASMUCH AS THAT IT HAS BEEN NOTED ON THE BODY OF THE KVPS THAT THE GOVT. OF INDIA PROMISED TO PAY TO ASHALATA PALCHOWDHURY AND BISWANATH PALCHOWDHU RY. THEREFORE, THE CLAIM OF OTHER PERSONS HAS NO BASIS AT ALL AS SUCH NOT ACCEPTED. MOREOVER, IT IS THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE, BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY IS THE OWNER OF THE SAID KVPS SINCE ASHALATA PALCHOWDHURY HAD NO INCOME FOR SUCH INVESTMENT. THE AO FOUND THAT TO AVOID THE TAX INCIDENCE HER NAME WAS INCLUDED. THE AO EXAMINED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE EXAMINED, BUT NO SUCH INVESTMENT HAS BEEN NOTED. HENCE, HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SAID INVESTMENT MADE IN KVPS WERE BELONGED TO THE ASSESSEE OUT OF UN DISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.2,20,000/ - BEING UNDISCLOSED SOURCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 7 . THE LD.CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ABOVE ACTION OF THE AO. 8 . THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI SOUMITRA CHOUDHURY, ADVOCATE ARGUED BEFORE US THAT ALL THE SAID KVPS ARE IN THE JOINT NAMES OF SMT. ASHALATA PALCHOWDHURY , GRANDMOTHER OF 3 ITA NO S . 1090 & 1091/KOL/2013 SMC - BP SH. BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE, SHRI BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY . SMT. ASHALATA P ALCHOWDHURY IS A GRANDMOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. SHE IS HOUSEWIFE, WHO WAS HAVI NG PAST SAVINGS AND FUND COLLECTED FROM HER HUSBAND, SHRI NIROD BARAN PALCHOWDHURY . THIS WAS HIS CEREMONIAL GIFTS. ALL THE KVPS WERE HAVING JOINT NAMES AND SECOND NAME WAS MENTIONED BEING THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPERATING THE SAME BECAU SE OF OLD AGE OF THE GRANDMOTHER. 9. THE LD.DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 10. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I AM CONVINCED WITH THE ARGUMENTS MADE BY SHRI SOUMITRA CHODHURY, ADVOCATE, LD . COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE . WE FIND THAT THE OLD GRAND MOTHER , SMT. ASHALATA PALCHOWDHURY HAD, IN FACT, INVESTED THE MONEY IN 22 NOS. KVP AMOUNTING TO RS.2,20,000/ - . THE AO MENTIONED IN HIS ORDER THAT ON THE BODY OF THE KVPS NOTED THAT THE GOVT. OF INDI A PROMISED TO PAY TO ASHALATA PALCHOWDHURY, GRANDMOTHER OF THE ASSESSEE, THEN HOW HE COULD TREAT ALL THE KVPS IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE ONLY BEING SECOND NAME MENTIONED IN ALL THE KVPS. HOWEVER, THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ARGUMENTS MADE B Y THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASESSEE BEFORE US ARE FOUND TO BE SATISFACTORY. THEREFORE, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE NO ADDITION ON THIS COUNT IS CALLED FOR. THUS, THE ADDITION SO MADE BY THE AO IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED AND THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS COUNT IS REVERSED. GROUND NOS. 3 & 4 OF THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. 11. GROUND NO.5 RELATES TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION BEING UNSECURED LOAN . 12. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AO FOUND THAT ASSESSEE TOOK UNSECURED LOAN DURING FY 2003 - 04 FROM THE FOLLOWING 5 PERSONS: - SL.NO NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AMOUNT OF LOAN 1. NARAYAN CHANDRA PALCHOWDHURY 50,000/ - 2. TARAK NATH GHOSAL 15,000/ - 3. TAPAN DAS 15,000/ - 4. BIMAL GHOSAL 15,000/ - 5. SOMNATH PALCHOWDHURY 15,000/ - TH E AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S. 131 OF THE ACT TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM ON 29.12.08. IN RESPONSE, SHRI TAPAN DAS APPEARED AND HIS STATEMENT WAS RECORDED. HE HAS STATED THAT HE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF COLD DRINKS. HIS MONTHLY INCOME IS RS.2000/ - TO 3000/ - . HIS F AMILY HAS FOUR MEMBERS. HE CAN SAVE RS.500/ - P.M AFTER MAINTAINING HIS FAMILY EXPENSES. MOREOVER, HE HAS STATED THAT LOAN OF RS.15,000/ - WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE OUT OF FUND RECEIVED FROM HIS FATHER. BUT SHRI TAPAN DAS COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE OF RECEIPT OF SUCH FUND. HE COULD NOT MENTION THE DATE OF GIVING THE LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS STATED THAT HE HAS ALREADY RECEIVED 4 ITA NO S . 1090 & 1091/KOL/2013 SMC - BP SH. BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY THE REPAYMENT OF THE LOAN AND THE LOAN WAS INTEREST FREE . THE ABOVE STATEMENT DOES NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE CREDIBILITY/CAPAB ILITY OF THE LOAN GIVEN BY SHRI TAPAN DAS. T HIS LOAN WAS OUTSTANDING ON 31 - 03 - 04 , BUT HE HAS STATED THAT HE RECEIVED OF THE LOAN. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LOAN CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM SHRI TAPAN DAS W A S NOT ACCEPTED TO THE A O AND TREATED THE SAME AS BOGUS LOAN. 12.1 SHRI NARAYNA CH. PALCHOWDHURY APPEARED IN RESPONSE TO SAID NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 131 OF THE ACT. DUE TO HIS ILLNESS, HIS STATEMENT COULD NOT BE RECORDED. HOWEVER, HE HAS SUBMITTED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION THAT LOAN OF R S.50,000/ - WAS GIVEN BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES. COPY OF PAY IN SLIP HAS BEEN ENCLOSED. IT WAS FOUND FROM THE BANK STATEMENT SUBMITTED ON 31 - 12 - 08 THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN CREDITED IN THE ASSESSEE S ACCOUNT ON 02 - 09 - 02 BY CHEQUES. SOMNATH PALCHOWDHURY HA S SUBMITTED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION STATING BECAUSE OF HIS ILLNESS HE COULD NOT APPEAR IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 131 OF THE I.T ACT . HE ALSO STATED THAT HE PAID A LOAN OF R S.15,000/ - TO THE ASSESSEE IN 2003. EXACT DATE COULD NOT BE REMEMBERED. HE FIL ED RETURN FOR THE AY 2003 - 04 ON 23 - 03 - 04. BUT NO BALANCE SHEET WAS FILED. THUS, THE GENUINENESS OF THE LOAN COULD NOT BE PROVED. ACCORDINGLY, HE CONSIDERED THE LOAN AS BOGUS. OTHER PERSONS NEITHER APPEARED NOR MADE ANY COMPLIANCE. THEREFORE, THE LOAN CLA IMED TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY S/SH. TARAK NATH GHOSAL AND BIMAL GHOSAL CONSIDERED AS BOGUS. 12.2 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE LOAN GIVEN BY THE FOLLOWING PERSONS AS DISCUSSED ABOVE WAS TREATED AS BOGUS LOAN: - SL.NO NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AMOUNT OF LOAN 1. TAR AK NATH GHOSAL 15,000/ - 2. TAPAN DAS 15,000/ - 3. BIMAL GHOSAL 15,000/ - 4. SOMNATH PALCHOWDHURY 15,000/ - TOTAL 60,000/ - THE AO ADDED THE AMOUNT OF RS.60,000/ - BEING BOGUS LOAN 13. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO IN MAKING THE ADDITI ON. 14. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . IT IS UNDISPUTED FACTS THAT NOTICES U/S. 131 OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED TO THE SAID PERSONS ON 29 - 12 - 08 . IN RESPONSE TO IT, SHRI TAPAN DAS, WHO HAD ADVANCED RS.15,000/ - TO THE ASSE SSEE WAS APPEARED. HE CONFIRMED THAT THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AO S ALLEGATION IS THAT HE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE OF RECEIPT OF SUCH FUND. THEREFORE, THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING AND ADDING THE SAME AS BOGUS LOAN. AS REGARD S HRI NARAYNA CH. PALCHOWDHURY APPEARED BEFORE THE 5 ITA NO S . 1090 & 1091/KOL/2013 SMC - BP SH. BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY AO IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 131 OF THE ACT . HE ALSO SUBMITTED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION AND CONFIRMED THAT LOAN OF RS.50,000/ - WAS GIVEN BY A/C PAYEE CHEQUES. SHRI SOMNATH PALCHOWDHURY HAS ALSO SUBMITTED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 131 OF THE ACT AND CONFIRMED HAVING GIVEN LOAN OF RS.15,000/ - TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ALLEGATION OF THE AO IS BASELESS AND WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATING/ADDING THE SAID LOAN AS BOGUS. 14.1 IN RESPECT OF OTHER CREDITORS DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO. IT DOES NOT TANTAMOUNT THAT THE SAID LOANS ARE BOGUS. ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS ONUS BY SUBMITTING NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE LOAN CRE DITORS. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE, THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE ADDITION TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS AC COUNT IS REVERSED. GROUND NO.5 OF THE ASS ESSEE S APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 15. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.1090/KOL/2013 FOR THE A.Y 2003 - 04 IS ALLOWED . ITA NO.1091/KOL/2013 A.Y 2004 - 05 (BY THE ASSESSEE): 16. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS O F THE CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 2. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS COMPLETELY WRONG IN NOT QUASHING THE REOPENING PROCEEDING U/S.147/143(3) OF THE I.T ACT WHICH IS COMPLET ELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 3. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS WRONG IN DITTOING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF R S. 16,280 / - AS ACCRUED INTEREST ON KVP WHICH IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND IL LEGAL. 4. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WRONG IN NOT ACCEPTING THE FACT THAT THE SAID KVP WERE ACQUIRED AND IN THE NAME OF HIS GRANDMOTHER, THEREFORE, THE WHOLE ADDITION IS RS. 16,280/ - IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 5. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) WAS WRONG IN DITTOING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 50 ,000/ - AS GIFT WHICH WAS RECEIVED BY HIS FATHER WHICH IS COMPLETELY ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND ILLEGAL. 6. FOR THAT THE INTER EST U/S. 234B CHARGED MECHANICALLY IS WRONG & ILLEGAL. 7. FOR THAT THE APPELLANT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ADDUCE ANY FURTHER GROUND OR GROUNDS, IF NECESSARY, AT OR BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 17 . GROUND NOS. 1 & 7 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. THEREFORE, THE SAME REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. 18 . THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS GROUND NO.2. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 6 ITA NO S . 1090 & 1091/KOL/2013 SMC - BP SH. BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY 19 . GROUND NO.6 WITH REGARD TO CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S. 234B OF THE ACT IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE. THEREFORE, THE S AME REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. 20 . GROUND NOS. 3 & 4 OF THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL RELATE TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 16,280/ - BEING ACCRUED INTEREST ON KVPS. THE AO MADE THE QUANTUM ADDITION IN THE IMMEDIATE PRECEDING YEAR I . E. AY 2003 - 04 AND OF INT. A CCRUED DURING THE YEAR . THE LD.CIT( A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. 21. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SINCE I HAVE ALREADY DIRECTED THE AO TO DELETE THE QUANTUM ADDITION IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, SHRI BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY IN ITA NO.1090/ KOL/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04 IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE , TH EREFORE, NO INTEREST CAN BE TREATED TO HAVE BEEN ACCRUED ON THE SAID KVPS. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION SO MADE IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED, THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS AC COUNT IS RE VERSED. GROUND NOS.3 & 4 OF THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL IN ITA NO.1091/KOL/2013 FOR THE A.Y 2004 - 05 ARE ALLOWED. 22. AS REGARD GROUND NO.5 THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A GIFT OF RS.50,000/ - FROM HIS FATHER SHRI UTTAM PALCHOWDHURY. NO RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2004 - 05 ALONG WITH DECLARATION WAS FILED BY SHRI UTTAM PALCHOWDHURY . THE AO TREATED/ADDED THE SAME AS BOGUS GIFT TO INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THIS ACTION OF THE AO. 23. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN A GIFT OF RS.50,000/ - FROM HIS FATHER, WHO HAS NOT FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y 2004 - 05 A ND ALSO NOT FILED DECLARATION FOR CONFIRMATION OF T HE SAID GIFT. BUT THE SAME HAS BEEN SUBMITTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO. NO DEFECT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE AO. SUCH DECLARATION HAS NOT BEEN PROVED TO BE FALSE BY THE AO. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE THE AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN TREATIN G THE SO GIFT AS BOGUS. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION. THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS COUNT IS REVERSED. GROUND NO.5 OF ASSESSEE S APPEAL IN ITA NO.1091/KOL/2013 FOR THE A.Y 2004 - 05 IS ALLOWED. 24. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEA LS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED AS STATED ABOVE. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 3 - 06 - 2015 SD/ - ( B.P.J AIN ) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 0 3 - 06 - 2015 7 ITA NO S . 1090 & 1091/KOL/2013 SMC - BP SH. BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY **PRADIP (SR.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT - SHRI BISWANATH PALCHOWDHURY, CHAWLPATTY P.O KATWA, DIST:BURDWAN - 713130. 2 RESPONDENT I . T.O, W 2(2), AAYKAR BHAWAN, COURT COMPOUND, BURDWAN - 713101. 3 . THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. 5. THE CIT CONCERNED THE D . R 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR