D.Chandrasekaran, Perundurai V. ACIT, Erode

ITA 389/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57953 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 16-02-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 02-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K GOPALAKRISHNA
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI C BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 389/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 D. CHANDRASEKARAN, 2/75, URUMANDAMPALAYAM, VELLODE POST, PERUNDURAI. [PAN: AFGPC6532G] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE II, ERODE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR , ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI K. GOPALAKRISHNA, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 16.02.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.02.2012 ORDER PER N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) I, COIMBATORE DATED 20.12.2010 PASSED IN APP EAL NO. 176/09-10 IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K. GOPALAKRISHNA, JCIT REP RESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 2. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS TAKEN 6 GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN AL L THE GROUNDS IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DISBELIEVING THE GIFTS OF ` .10,00,000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE CLOSE RELATIVES AND CONFIRMING TH E ADDITION MADE BY THE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.389 389389 389/M/11 /M/11 /M/11 /M/11 2 ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED GIFTS OF ` .3.00 LAKHS FROM SMT. MYLATHAL, ` . 3.00 LAKHS FROM SMT. SAMIATHAL AND ` .4.00 LAKHS FROM SMT. AMMANIAMMAL, WHICH WERE NOT ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ADDED THE SAM E TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE LD. AR A RGUED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISBELIEVED THE GIFTS ON THE GROUND THAT THE DRAWING OF THE DONORS WAS MEAGER AND THEREFORE, WERE NOT CAPAB LE TO GIVE GIFT TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT EXAMINING THE CAPACITY OF THE DONO RS. HE SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINING THE CAPACITY OF THE DONORS AND THEREAFTER DECIDING THE ISSUE AFRESH. 3. BOTH THE PARTIES BEFORE US AGREED THAT THE ISSU E SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMIN E THE CAPACITY OF THE DONORS BY TAKING ALL THE RELEVANT FACTORS INTO CONS IDERATION AND THEREAFTER TO READJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH. 4. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT SHALL BE FAIR AND IN THE INTEREST OF THE JUSTICE TO RESTORE THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR PROPER VERIFICATION AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ALL TH E RELEVANT FACTORS AND THEREAFTER DECIDING THE ISSUE AS PER LAW AFTER ALLO WING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. T HUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. NO OTHER POINT HAS BEEN URGED BY THE ASSESSEE E XCEPT THE ABOVE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.389 389389 389/M/11 /M/11 /M/11 /M/11 3 POINT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES ON 16.02.2012. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER (N.S.SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 16.02.2012 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.