Shri Jethmal Agarwal, JODHPUR V. ACIT, JODHPUR

ITA 442/JODH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 44223314 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 27-11-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR DEEPAK SEHGAL
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL : JODHPUR BENC H : JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO. 442/JODH/2013 (A.Y. 2004-05) SHRI JETH MAL AGARWAL VS. THE ACIT C/O JANTA SWEET HOME PVT. LTD. CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NAI SARAK, JODHPUR JODHPUR. PAN NO. AEPTA5610M (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AMIT KOTHARI DEPARTMENT BY : DR. DEEPAK SEHGAL, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 27/11/2013. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/11/2013. O R D E R PER N.K.SAINI, A.M THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDE R DATED 18/07/2013 OF LD. CIT (A), CENTRAL, JAIPUR. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 5 ,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF THE GIFTS. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN RECEIPT OF THE GIFTS DURING THE YEAR AS UNDER:- 2 I) DINESH CHANDRA MAHESH CHANDRA HUF RS. 1,50,00 0/- II) MAHESH CHANDRA SUSHIL CHANDRA AGARWAL HUF RS. 1,50,000/- III) RAJENDRA KUMAR CHAMPAK LAL HUF RS. 2,00,000 /-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO PR OVE THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS, GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS A ND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DONORS. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED COPY OF GIFT DEEDS, COPIES OF INCOME TAX RETURN AND COPIES OF CAPITAL ACCOUNTS OF THE DONORS . AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE DONORS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER TO BE REFERRED AS THE ACT) B Y OBSERVING THAT THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE DONORS REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A ) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICE R CONCLUSIVELY EXPLAINED THE GENUINENESS OF GIFT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE DU RING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED COPIES O F GIFT DEEDS, COPIES OF THE RETURNS OF INCOME SUBMITTED BY THE DONORS, COPIES O F BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CAPITAL ACCOUNTS OF THE DONORS FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 ST MARCH, 2004. IT WAS STATED THAT THE SUBMISSION WAS MADE TO THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER THAT THE DONORS ARE PERMANENT RESIDING AT AHMADABAD AND ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR PREOCCUPATION WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COME TO JODHPUR ON 15/12/2010 AND IT WAS REQUESTED THAT EVEN AFTER SUBMITTING SUCH VOLUMINOUS EVIDENCE S, IF IT WAS STILL DESIRED THAT THEIR PERSONAL PRESENCE WAS NECESSARY, A COMMI SSION MAY BE SET UP FOR 3 NECESSARY VERIFICATION. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE GIFTS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH REGULAR BANKING CHANNELS FROM PERSONS WHO A RE EXISTING INCOME TAX ASSESSEES AND HAD CONFIRMED THE FACT OF GIFT SO MAD E BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT OR DECLARATION OF GIFT WHICH HAD BEEN ACCEPTED AS GENU INE. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS:- A. NEK KUMAR V/S ACIT (2005) 274 ITR 575 (RAJ.) B. CIT V/S PADAM SINGH CHOUHAN (2008) 3 DTR (RAJ.) 190. C. MS. MAYAWATI V/S DCIT (2008) 113 TTJ (DEL.) 178 . D. ANAND PRAKASH AGARWAL V/S ACIT (2008) 6 DTR (AL L)(TRI) 191. E. CIT V/S MRS. SUNITA VACHANI (1990) 184 ITR 121 (DEL.) 4. THE LD. CIT(A), HOWEVER, DID NOT FIND MERIT IN T HE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. NOW THE ASSESS EE IS IN APPEAL. 5. DURING COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CA SE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN AGARWAL H UF V/S ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR IN I.T.A. NOS. 443 & 444/JODH/201 3 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2005-06 RESPECTIVELY. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE BELONGS TO THE SAME GROUP TO WHICH SHRI SATYANARAYA N AGARWAL HUF BELONGS, THEREFORE, THE SAME TREATMENT IS TO BE GIVEN TO THI S CASE AS TO THE CASE OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN AGARWAL HUF (SUPRA). 6. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LEARNED D.R., ALTH OUGH, SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW BUT COULD NOT CONTR OVERT THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE FACTS O F THE PRESENT CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATYANARA YAN AGARWAL HUF V/S ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR (SUPRA), WHICH WE HAVE DI SPOSED OF VIDE ORDER OF EVEN DATE AND THE RELEVANT FINDINGS THEREIN ARE GIV EN IN PARA 8, WHICH READ AS UNDER:- 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, F URNISHED THE COPIES OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN, COMPUTATION OF INCOME , BALANCE SHEET SHOWING THE CAPITAL, GIFT DEED, COPY OF PAN CARD, C OPY OF DRAFT RECEIVED TOWARDS GIFT IN RESPECT OF ALL THE DONORS. THOSE DO CUMENTS WERE NOT DOUBTED. COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN, ESTABLI SHED THE IDENTITY OF THE DONOR, THEIR BALANCE SHEET WAS SHOWING THE SUFF ICIENT CAPITAL TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS AND THE GIFTS WERE GIVEN VIDE DRAFTS AND GIFT DEED WAS ALSO EXECUTED, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO OCC ASION TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORD ER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE ADDITION SUSTAINED IS DELETED. SO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID REFERRED TO ORDER OF EVEN DATE IN I.T.A. NOS. 443 & 444/JODH/2013 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2005-06 RESPECTIVELY IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATYAN ARAYAN AGARWAL HUF V/S ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY HIM IS DELETED. 5 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 29.11.2013). SD/- SD/- (HARI OM MARATHA) (N.K.SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 29.11.2013 RANJAN* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE LD.CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE D.R ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, JODHPUR.