R.Deepam, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1151/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95975 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEM BER I.T.A. NO. 11 5 1 / MDS/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 0 9 MRS. R. DEEPAM, 18, IIND MAIN ROAD, CIT COLONY, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI 4. [PAN: A EJPD6400J ] VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , COMPANY CIRCLE VI(3) CHENNAI. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P .RADHAKRISHNAN, J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 1 9 . 0 8 .201 5 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 28 . 0 8 .201 5 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH I S APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 1 5 , C HENNAI , DATED 1 2 . 0 3 .20 1 5 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 0 9 . 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS THE DIRECTOR OF SOUTHERN INDIA DEPOSITORY SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF .11,09,733/ - . THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT . THE CASE OF THE I.T.A. NO . 1 1 5 1 /M/ 15 2 ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND AFTER DUE PROCESS, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED GIFT DURING THE YEAR 2007 - 08 FROM THE FOLLOWING PERSONS: I. ARUNACHALAM .2,00,000/ - II. G. NEELAMBIGAI . 27,678/ - III. MAHESH . 20,000/ - TOTAL .2,47,678/ - 3. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PRODUCE DETAILS OF THE DONORS. SO FAR AS G. NEELAMBIGAI AND MAHESH ARE CONCERNED, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY DETAI LS. REGARDING GIFT RECEIVED FROM HER FATHER ARUNACHALAM, THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED CONFIRMATION LETTER. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TREATED THE ENTIRE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE. 4. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THE AMOUNT OF .27,678/ - WAS GIFTED TO THE ASSESSEE BY HER MOTHER - IN - LAW MRS. G. NEELAMBIGAI AND .20,000/ - WAS GIVEN BY HER BROTHER MR. MAHESH AND .2,00,000/ - WAS GIVEN BY HER FATHER. THE LD. CIT(A) CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN THE COURS E OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AFTER CONSIDERING THE CONFIRMATION FILED BY THE DONORS, ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND REMAND REPORT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT , HAS OBSER VED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT EXAMINING THE I.T.A. NO . 1 1 5 1 /M/ 15 3 GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE TRANSACTION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT NOT TO HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED .2,00,000/ - FROM HER FATHER AND HE FILED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER AT PAPER BOOK PAGE ANNEXURE I, WHEREIN THE AMOUNT WAS GIVEN THROUGH DEMAND DRAFT NO. 100969 DATED 17.01.200 8. THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM HER MOTHER - IN - LAW, CONFIRMATION LETTER WAS FILED IN ANNEXURE II AND ANNEXURE III PERTAINS TO CONFIRMATION FROM HER BROTHER. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE GIFTS RECEIVED ARE FROM CLOSE RELATIVES AND HAVING ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT NOT HAVE DOUBTED THE TRANSACTIONS AT THIS STAGE AND PRAYED THAT THE ADDITION MAY BE DELETED. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE L D. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONORS AND SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER S OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED .2 LAKHS FROM SHRI ARUNACHALAM , WHO IS FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE I.T.A. NO . 1 1 5 1 /M/ 15 4 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ASKED CONFIRMATION FROM THE DONORS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY CONFIRMATION. HOWEVER, DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM HER FATHER, WHEREIN, THE DEMAND DRAFT NO. 100969 DATED 17.01.2008 WAS DRAWN IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN KARNATAKA BANK LTD. BASED ON THE CONFIRMATION AND DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REMAND REPORT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DOUBTED THE TRANSACTION EVEN AFTER CALLING THE REMAND REPORT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT NOT TO HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED THE CONFIRMATION LETTER FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT EXAMINING THE GENUINENESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS. WE FIND THAT THE AMOUNT IN DISPUTE HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HER FATHER THROUGH BANK DEMAND DRAFT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AFTER EXAMINING THE CONFIRMATION FILED BY THE AS SESSEE, ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THERE IS NOTHING INGENUINE IN RECEIVING THE GIFT FROM HER FATHER IN THE LIGHT OF CONFIRMATION AND DEMAND DRAFT COPY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS GROUND IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. 8. WITH REGARD TO THE GIFT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HER MOTHER - IN - LAW AND BROTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONFIRMATION LETTER FROM BOTH PARTIES. WE FIND THAT MRS. NEELAMBIGA I HAS GIVEN CONFIRMATION LETTER STATING THAT SHE HAS GIVEN A CHEQUE BEARING NO. 281562 DATED 10.10.2007 FOR .27,678/ - AS I.T.A. NO . 1 1 5 1 /M/ 15 5 PER ANNEXURE II. MR. MAHESH, BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO GIVEN CONFIRMATION LETTER STATING THAT HE HAS GIVEN A DEMAND DRAFT BEARI NG NO. 603550 DT. 22.10.2007 FOR .20,000/ - AS GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THERE IS NOTHING INGENUINE IN RECEIVING THE GIFT FROM HER FATHER IN THE LIGHT OF CONFIRMATION AND DEMAND DRAFT COPY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDI NGS. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS GROUND IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. WE FIND THAT THERE IS NOTHING INGENUINE IN RECEIVING THE GIFT FROM HER MOTHER - IN - LAW AND BROTHER IN THE LIGHT OF CONFIRMATION LETTERS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS AND ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITIONS MADE ON THIS GROUND ARE ALSO DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND ALLOW E D THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 9 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 28 TH OF AUGUST, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( V. DURGA RAO ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 28. 0 8 . 201 5 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.