Soniya Ashikkumar Sachdev, Kolhapur V. Income-tax Officer, Ward – 2(2), Kolhapur

ITA 3002/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9022 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 03-07-2019
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 18-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ARISES OUT OF PASSED
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT . / ITA NO.3002/PUN/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SONIYA ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV, F WING, FLAT NO.104, E WARD, AYODHYA PARK, OLD PUNE BANGLORE ROAD, KAWALA NAKA, KOLHAPUR. PAN : CXPPS2539N VS. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOLHAPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASS ED BY THE CIT(A)-2, KOLHAPUR ON 14.11.2017 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF THE ADDITION OF RS.14,05,000/- U/S 69A OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT). APPELLANT BY SHRI M. K. KULKARNI RESPONDENT BY SHRI S. P. WALIMBE DATE OF HEARING 13-01-2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 14-01-2020 ITA NO.3002/PUN/2017 SONIYA ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV 2 3. SUCCINCTLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE M ADE CASH DEPOSITS AMOUNTING TO RS.14,05,000/- IN HER SAVING B ANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED WITH THE SARASWAT CO-OP. BANK LTD., NEW SHAHUPURI BRANCH, KOLHAPUR. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO EXPLA IN THE SOURCE OF SUCH CASH DEPOSITS, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SHE HAS RECEIVED A SUM OF RS.11,01,500/- AS CASH GIFT FROM HER BROTHER, LATE SH. SANDEEP ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV AS WAS EVIDENCED BY GIFT DEED DATED 15.03.2013. REMAINING AMOU NT OF RS.3,03,500/- WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED OUT OF HER PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS AND RE-DEPOSITING OF WITHDRAWALS FROM SAME BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THA T THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION WAS ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED FROM THE BROTHER ON CERTAIN DATES, NAMELY, 15.12.2012 RS.2,80,000/-; 17.1 2.2012 RS.5,00,000/-; 27.12.2012 RS.21,500/-; 31.12.201 2 RS.1,00,000/-; 15.03.2013 RS.2,00,000/-. AS AGAINS T THAT CASH WAS DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HER BANK ACCOUNT ON 03.05.2013 RS.5,05,000/-; 06.05.2013 RS.5,00,000 /-; 06.06.2013 RS.2,00,000/-; 21.03.2014 RS.2,00,000 /-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION BY NOTICING THAT ALLEGED DECLARATION OF GIFT DATED 15.3.2013 WAS DRAWN ON A STAMP PAPER OF RS.1 00/-, ITA NO.3002/PUN/2017 SONIYA ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV 3 WHICH WAS ACTUALLY PURCHASED ON 13.03.2015. HE, THEREF ORE, MADE THE ADDITION FOR THE FULL AMOUNT. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPE AL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF ABOVE ADDITION. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.11,01,000/- FROM HIS BROTHER, NAMELY, LATE SH. SANDEEP ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV THROUGH GIFT DEED DRAWN ON 15.03.2013. IT WAS ONLY ON THE EXAMINATION OF THE SAID GIFT DEED THAT IT TRANSPIRED THAT THE STAMP PAPER USED FOR THE SAID GIFT DEED OF RS.100/- WAS ACTUALLY PURCHASED ON 13.03.2015. THIS SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED STAMP PAPER TWO YEARS AFTER THE ALLEGED DECLARATIO N OF GIFT. SUCH AN ILLEGAL PRACTICE CANNOT BE COUNTENANCED. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REGULARLY MAINTAININ G A BANK ACCOUNT. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION AS TO WHY SUCH A HUGE CASH OF RS.11,01, 500/- WAS NOT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT FOR A PERIOD CLOSE TO SIX MONTHS. IN VIEW OF SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM SATISFIED THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUCCESSFULLY PROVED THAT SHE GENUINELY ITA NO.3002/PUN/2017 SONIYA ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV 4 RECEIVED GIFT OF RS.11,01,500/- FROM HER BROTHER. EXPLA NATION TO THIS EXTENT IS, THEREFORE, REJECTED AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS UPHELD. 5. AS REGARDS THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.3,03,500/-, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THIS WAS OUT OF PROFESSIONAL RECEIPTS AND RE- DEPOSITING OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE SAME BANK ACCOUNT. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND ALSO THE AMOUNT OF INCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURN, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE SUCCESSFULLY TENDERED THE EXPLANATION ON THIS SCO RE. I, THEREFORE, REVERSE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.3,03,500/-. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH JANUARY, 2020. SD/- (R.S.SYAL) / VICE PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 14 TH JANUARY, 2020 SUJEET ITA NO.3002/PUN/2017 SONIYA ASHOKKUMAR SACHDEV 5 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (APPEALS)-2, KOLHAPUR 4. THE PR. CIT-2, KOLHAPUR 5. , , SMC / DR SMC, ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 13-01-2020 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 13-01-2020 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER -- JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. -- JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *