DCIT, Hisar V. Shri Mukul Dev Tayal, Hisar

ITA 120/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0127 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 16-03-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PIYUSH SONKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWANI TANEJA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH E : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.120/DEL./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) DCIT, HISAR. VS. MUKUL DEV TAYAL, C/OTAYAL SONS, KATH MANDI ROAD, HISAR. (PAN/GIR NO.ADAPT9212E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ADV. REVENUE BY : SHRI PIYUSH SONKAR, SR.DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA: AM THIS APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), RO HTAK DATED 10.11.2010. THE GROUND OF APPEAL READS AS UNDER: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF `15,00,000/- M ADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 BY HOLDING THAT THE GIFTS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM SH. ATUL TAYAL, AS GENUINE. 2. THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF A DDITION OF `15,00,000/- MADE U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 BY HO LDING THAT THE GIFTS CLAIMED IS NOT GENUINE. THE APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDU AL DRAWING SALARY FROM M/S TAYAL SONS LTD., HISAR. DURING THE YEAR, HE HAS RECEIVED GIFT OF `15,00,000/- FROM HIS BROTHER ATUL TAYAL, WHO IS E MPLOYED WITH M/S ROLTA INDIA LTD., DRAWING A SALARY OF `90.28 LAKHS. P .A. 3. BOTH SIDES WERE HEARD. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES, WE HOLD THAT THE GIFT WA S MADE BY THE BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE THE IDENTITY OF THE DON OR IS NOT IN I.T.A. NO.120/DEL./2011 (A.Y. : 2006-07) 2 DOUBT. THE DONOR HAS CONFIRMED THE GIFT MADE. THE GIFT IS OUT OF NATURAL LOVE AND AFFECTION AS DONEE IS BROTHER OF DON OR. THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONOR IS ALSO ESTABLISHED AS HE WA S DRAWING SALARY OF MORE THAN `91 LAKHS IN A YEAR. FURTHER, TH E CASH DEPOSITED IN THE DONORS ACCOUNT PRIOR TO MAKING THE GIFT HAS BEEN LOOKED INTO BY THE I.T. AUTHORITIES AND NO ADVERSE INFERENCE WAS DRA WN ON THIS COUNT IN THE ASSESSMENT OF THE DONOR. THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IS ALSO ESTABLISHED. CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTS, THE CIT(A ) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITION. WE, THEREFORE, SUSTAIN THE ORD ER OF THE CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE REVENUES APPEAL. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 16/3/11. SD/- SD/- [RAJPAL YADAV] [B.C. MEENA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 16/03/2011 SKB COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A), ROHTAK. 5. CIT( ITAT) BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES