Dr. Niveditha Sharma, Warangal V. ACIT, Circle-1, Warangal

ITA 541/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 54122514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K V CHALAMAIAH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Gift; Depreciation; Reasonable cause; Onus to prove

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. ASSESS - MENT YEAR APPELLANT RESPONDENT 538/HYD/2013 2005 - 06 M / S. PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE, WARANGAL. (PAN AAKEP 6736 H) ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 1, WARANGAL 539/HYD/2013 547/HYD/2013 2005 - 06 2004 - 05 DR.PREMRAJ SHARMA, WARANGAL (PAN - ADVPS 0687 D) ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 1, WARANGAL 540/HYD/2013 541/HYD/2013 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 DR. NIVEDITHA SHARMA, WARANGAL. (PAN ADMPS 3277D) ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 1, WARANGAL APPELLANTS BY : SHRI K.V.CHALAMAIAH RE SPONDENTS BY : SHRI SOLGY JOSE T.KOTTARAM DR DATE OF HEARING 03 .0 7 .2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25. 0 7.2014 O R D E R PER SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THERE ARE FIVE APPEALS BY THREE ASSESSEES IN THIS BUNCH. ONE OF THEM BY THE FIRM, M/S. PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE, WARANGAL , I S DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) 18 MUMBAI ( CAMP HYDERABAD ) HAVING CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OVER CIT(A) - VI , DATED 14.2.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06, THE OTHER FOUR APPEALS ARE TWO EACH BY ITS PARTNERS, D R PREM RAJ SHARMA, AND DR. NIVEDITA S HARMA, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06. SINCE THERE ARE CERTAIN COMMON FEATURES, TH E SE APPEALS ARE BEING DISPOSED OF WITH THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVE N IEN CE. ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 2 APPEAL OF M/S. PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE, WARANGAL. ITA NO. 538/HYD/2013 : ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE - FIRM IN THIS CASE RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEPR E C I ATION OF RS.5,19,716 ON THE COST OF ADDITIONS TO THE MACHINERY OF R S .23,15,348 MADE DURING THE YEAR. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED DEPRECIATION OF RS .5,19,716 ON THE COST OF ASSETS ADDED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YE A R AMOUNTING TO R S .23,15,348, ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NO T FURNISH RELEVANT BILLS/INVOICES FOR PURCHASE OF MACHINERY IN SPI T E OF OPPORTUNITIES GIVEN. 4. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY ACTION ON THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 14.9.2006, THE DEPARTMENT HAD MADE OUT LI S T OF P A PERS AND DOCUM E N T S FOUND AS PER ANN E XURE - I, IMPO U NDED THE SAME AND KEPT IN TH E CU S TODY OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WHEN AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO TRACE THE RELEVANT INVOICES FROM OUT O F TH E IMPOUNDED MATERIAL, THE RELEVANT FOLDER CONTAINING THOSE INVOICES WAS NO T TRACEABLE. WHEN THIS FACT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NO T ICE O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE SIMPLY EXPRESSED HELPLESSNESS, STATING THAT WHATEVER IMPOUNDED MATERIAL WAS HANDED OVER TO HIM BY H IS PREDECESSOR, WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, AND IF RELEVANT PAPERS WERE NOT TRACEABLE, HE COULD NOT HELP IN THE MATTER. CONSIDERING THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE RELEVANT INVOICES WERE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE BEEN IMPOUNDED AT THE TIM E OF SURVEY, BUT WERE NOT TRACEABLE IN THE IMPOUNDED MATERIAL GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE ASSESSEE ON ITS REQUEST, THE CIT(A) REMANDED THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER . A FTER GOING THROUGH THE MATTER IN THE LIGHT OF SUCH REMAND REPORT RECEIVED FRO M THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AND THE SUBMI S SION S OF THE ASSESSEE THEREON, THE CIT(A) , OBSERVED THAT ONUS IS ON THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL BILLS AND VOUCHERS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CLAIMING DEPRECIATION ON THE ASSETS IN QUESTION, BUT SIN C E THE ASSESSEE FAI L ED TO ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 3 D I S CHARGE SUCH AN ONUS, HE UPHELD THE DI S ALLOWANCE. HE HOWEVER, TAKING NOTE OF THE SATISFACTION EXPRESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE REMAND REPORT WITH REGARD TO INVOICE IN RESPE C T OF ONE ITEM, DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER T O ALLO W DEPRECIATION ONLY WITH REGARD TO THAT INVOICE OF RS .54,000, BUT CONFIRMED DISALLOWANCE WITH REGARD TO OTHER ITEMS OF MACHINERY/ASSETS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE DISALLOWANCE SUS TAINED BY THE CIT(A), ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND OTHER MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS ON ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEES INABILITY TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL INVO ICES IN SUPPORT OF THE PURCHASE OF MACHINERY, CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PURCHASED DURING THE YEAR, THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON SUCH ADDITIONS TO THE ASSETS. IT IS THE CA S E OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE INVO ICES IN RESPE C T OF MACHINERY PURCH AS ED DURING THE Y E AR WAS PART OF THE IMPOUNDED MATERIAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY ACTION UNDER S.133 OF THE ACT. THAT BEING SO, THE RELEVANT MATERIAL WAS ALREADY IN THE POSSESSION OF THE DEPARTMENT, AND IN T HAT CIRCUMSTANCE, HOLDING THE MATERIAL IN ITS OWN CUSTODY, THE DEPARTMENT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN EXPECTING THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL INVOICES AS A PRE - REQUISITE FOR ALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON THE ASSETS PURCHASED DURING THE YEAR. MORE SO, WHEN T HE RELEVANT FOLDER CONTAINING THE ORIGINAL INVOICES WERE NOT TRACEABLE, AND THE ASSESSEE IS BEING PENALIZED FOR NON - PRODUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL INVOICES NOT TRACEABLE IN THE IMPOUNDED MATERIAL. WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT FOR THE AS SESSEES INABILITY TO PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL INVOICES IN RESPECT OF MACHINERY/ASSETS ADDED DURING THE YEAR, DEPARTMENT TOO IS RESPONSIBLE, AND AS SUCH , THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT PRODUCING THE SAME AT THE RELEVANT POINT OF TIME BEFO RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NOW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO PRODUCE SUCH INVOICES, COPIES OF WHICH DULY C ERTIFIED ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 4 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ARE ALSO FURNISHED IN THE PAPER - BOOK, AND A CURSORY GLANCE AT THOSE INVOICES CL E AR REVEAL THE RELEVANT MACH INERY/ASSETS HAVING BEEN ACQUIRED DURING THE PREVIOUS Y E AR RELEVANT TO THE YEAR UN D ER APPEAL, WE DEEM IT JUST AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE I M PU G N E D ORD E R OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS I S SUE AND RESTORE THE MATT E R TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH DETERMINATION. WE DO SO ACCORDINGLY, AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE AFRESH, AND ALLOW THE CLAIM OF TH E ASSESSEE FOR DEPRECIATION ON THE MACHINERY/ASSETS ADDED DURING THE Y E AR, AFTER DUE VERIFICATION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEES GROUNDS IN THIS APPEAL ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL, ITA NO.538/HYD/2013 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. OTHER APPEAL S FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2004 - 05: DR.PREMRAJ SHARMA : ITA NO.539/HYD/2013 AND APPEALS OF DR. NIVEDITA SHARMA : ITA NO.540/HYD/2013 8. IN THESE APPEALS, EFFECTIVE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEES, IS AGAINST THE ADDITIONS MADE UNDER S.68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF UNPROVED GIFTS OF RS.9,20,000 IN THE CASE OF DR.PREMRAJ SHARMA; AND OF RS.1,40,000 IN THE CASES OF DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA. 9. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE A SSESSEES HAVE , EXPLAINING THE SOURCES FOR THE CAPITAL INTRODUCED BY THEM IN THE FIRM IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05, CLAIMED AMOUNTS OF RS.9,20,000 IN THE CASE OF DR.PREM RAJ SHARMA AND OF RS.1,40,000 IN THE CASE OF DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA , AS REPRESENTING THE GIFTS RECEIVED BY THEM ON THE OCCASION OF INAUGURATION OF THE HOSPITAL. ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED TO FURNISH COMPL E TE DETAILS OF THE NATURE OF THE GIFTS RECEIVED AND ALSO SUBSTANTIATE THE GENUINENESS O F THE TRANSACTION ALONGWITH THE ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 5 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE . IN RESPONSE IT WA S STATED BY THE ASSESSEES THAT THE GIFTS RECEIVED WERE AT THE TIME OF OPENING OF THE HOSPITAL ON 1.12.2003 BY WAY OF CASH/CHEQUE FROM FRIENDS, RELATIVES AND MEDICAL REPRESENTATIVES FOR WHICH NO LIST HAS BEEN MAINTAINED. EXCEPT STATING SO, THE ASSESSEE S HA VE NO T FURNI S H E D ANY OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION OR EVIDENCE. OBSERVING IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE ASSESSEES HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS THAT LAY ON THEM TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF HAVING RECEIVED THE GIFTS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, TREATED THESE GI FTS OF RS.9,20,000 AND RS.1,40,000 AS UNPROVED, AND CONSEQUENTLY MADE RESPECTIVE ADDITIONS IN THE HANDS OF THESE TWO INDIVIDUALS. 10. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY T HE ASSESSEES TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF HAVING RECEIVED THE GIFTS ON THE OCCASION OF INAUGURATION OF THE HOSPITAL. 11. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEES PREFERRED SECOND APPEALS BEFORE US ON THIS ISSUE. 12. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND OTHER MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THOUGH THE ASSESSEES HAVE CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVED HUGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY GIFTS FROM FRIENDS, RELATIVES, MEDICAL REPRESENTATIVES AND SO ON, ON THE OCCASION OF INAUGURATION OF THEIR HOSPITAL, T HEY COULD NOT FURNISH EITHER THE DETAILS OF SUCH PERSONS WHO GAVE THE GIFTS, NOR ANY OTHER DETAILS OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CLAIM. SOME OF THE GIFTS HAVE BEEN CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES AS WELL. HOWEVER, NO DETA ILS WERE FURNISHED IN THAT BEHALF. WHEN THE ASSESSEES MAKE A CLAIM OF HAVING RECEIVED MONIES/GIFTS, BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON THEM TO ESTABLISH THE CORRECTNESS OF SUCH CLAIM, BY FURNISHING RELEVANT DETAILS AND NECESSARY EVIDENCE. ASSESSEES HAVE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS THAT LAY ON THEM IN THAT BEHALF. EVEN BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE S COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF HAVING RECEIVED THE GIFTS. ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 6 CONSIDERING THE MAGNITUDE OF THE AMOUNT OF GIFTS CLAIMED, AND IN VIEW OF ASSESSEES FAILURE TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS OF ESTABLISHING THE IDENTITY OF THE DONORS, THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFTS CLAIMED, WE CANNOT FIND FAULT WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN NOT ACCEPTING THE GIFTS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. E XPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE OF HAVING RECEIVED THE GIFTS ALSO NEEDS TO BE VIEWED IN THE BACKDROP OF THE NEED FOR THE ASSESSEES TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCES FOR THE AMOUNTS OF CAPITAL INTRODUCED BY THEM IN THE FIRM, M/S. PREM SHARMA CARD IAC CARE CENTRE, WARANGAL. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEES ARE IN MEDICAL PROFESSION WITH SUCH A STANDING THAT THEY COULD ESTABLISH A HOSPITAL OF THEIR OWN, WE HOLD THAT THE AMOUNTS OF GIFTS MAY BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEES FROM THEIR PROFESSION, INSTEAD AS UNEXPLAINED CREDITS LIABLE FOR ADDITION UNDER S.68 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) FOR THIS YEAR ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER I S DIRECTED TO MODIFY THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS BEHALF. 13. IN THE RESULT, THESE TWO APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 ARE TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED OTHER APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06 DR.PREM RAJ SHARMA : ITA NO.547/HYD/2013 DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA : ITA NO.541/HYD/2013 : 14 . IN THESE APPEALS, EFFECTIVE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEES, IS AGAINST THE ADDITIONS MADE UNDER S.68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF UNPROVED GIFT RS.8,32,350 IN THE CASE OF DR.PREMRAJ SHARMA; AND OF RS.4,1 0,000 IN THE CASE OF DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004 - 05. 1 5 . BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06, AN AMOUNT OF RS.8,32,350 IN THE CASE OF DR. P REMRAJ SHARMA HAS BEEN CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AS GIFT FROM HIS FATHER SHRI R.P.SHARMA ON HIS DEMISE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 7 FURNISH THE COMPLETE DETAILS AS TO NATURE OF GIFTS RECEIVED AND SUBSTANTIATE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS ALONGWITH DOCUMENTARY EV IDENCE, IT WAS STATED VIDE LETTER FIL E D ON 21.3.2007 THAT THE GIFT WAS RECEIVED F R OM HIS FATHER BY WAY OF CHEQUES AND THE SOURCES FOR THE SAME WAS DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS BY THE SONS OF LATE SRI RAJENDRA PRASAD SHARMA. EXCEPT SATING SO, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION CALLED FOR VIDE LETTER DATED 12.11.2007. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE CREDIT APPEARING TO THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT, TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SAME AS UNEXPLAINED AND MADE ADDITION IN THAT BEHALF UNDER S.68 OF THE ACT. 1 6 . SO ALSO, DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06, EXPLAINED AN AMOUNT OF RS.4,10,000 AS HAVING RECEIVED BY WAY OF GIFT FROM HER FATHER, SHRI M.N.SHUKLA. IN RESPONSE TO THE ENQUIRY FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, EXCEPT FOR STATING THAT THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES FROM HER FATHER AND THE SOURCES FOR THE S AME WAS OUT OF HIS OWN SAVINGS, ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH ANY OTHER EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT, TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CLAIM OF HAVING RECEIVED THE GIFTS IN QUESTION. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE CRE DIT APPEARING IN THE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE FIRM IN HER NAME, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION IN THAT BEHALF, UNDER S.68 OF THE ACT, WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT IN HER HANDS, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06. 17. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISBELIEVING THE GIFTS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEES. 18. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEES PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEALS BEFORE US FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06. 19. WE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND OTHER MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THOUGH THE ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 8 ASSESSEES HAVE CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVED GIFTS IN QUESTION FROM THEIR RESP E CTIVE FATHERS, AND AS SUCH, THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE IDENTITY OF THE DONORS, ASSESSEES HAVE FAILED TO ESTABLISH EITHER THE CREDIT - WORTHINESS OF THE DONORS OR THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. SINCE THE GIFTS WERE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES AND FROM THE PARENTS ITSELF, THERE MUST BE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THAT BEHALF, AND THE ASSESSEES COULD HAVE VERY WELL ESTABLISHED THE CREDIT - WORTHINESS OF THE DONORS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS , FOR ESTABLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THEIR CLAIMS OF HAVING RECEIVED THE GIFTS IN QUESTION. IN FACT, ONE OF THE ASSESSEE S , DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA, COULD HAVE EVEN PRODUCED THE DONOR BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ESTABLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEES HAVE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS OF ESTABLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS, AND NO DETAILS WERE FURNISHED IN THAT BEHALF. WHEN THE ASSESSEE S MAKE A CLAIM OF HAVING RECEIVED MONIES/GIFTS OF SUCH MAGNITUDE, BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON THEM TO ESTABLISH THE CORRECTNESS OF SUCH CLAIM, BY FURNISHING RELEV ANT DETAILS AND NECESSARY EVIDENCE. SINCE THE ASSESSEES HAVE FAILED TO DISCHARGE THE ONUS THAT LIES ON THEM, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THEIR CLAIMS WITH REGARD TO THE GIFTS RECEIVED. HOWEVER, CONSIDERING TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE, MORE PARTICULARLY, THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEES IN THIS CASE, HAVE CLAIMED TO HAVE RECEIVED THE GIFTS IN QUESTION FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE FATHERS, OUT OF NATURAL LOVE AND AFFECTION, AND THE AMOUNTS IN QUESTION ALSO ARE ALSO CLAIMED TO HA VE BEEN RECEIVED BY WAY OF CHEQUES, THERE MUST BE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIMS MADE IN THAT BEHALF. AS NOTED ABOVE, DR. NIVEDITA SHARMA COULD HAVE EVEN PRODUCED HER FATHER BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINATION , TO SUBSTANTIATE THE C LAIM OF H AVING RECEIVED THE GIFT BY HER. CONSIDERING TOTALITY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT JUST AND PROPER TO SET ASIDE THE IMPU G N E D ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER, AFTER GIVING ONE MORE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEES TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CLAIMS OF HAVING RECEIVED GIFTS IN QUESTION FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE FATHERS. ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 9 ASSESSEES ARE ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS BEHALF BY COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICES. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS AT LIBERTY TO ARRIVE AT PROPER CONCLUSION WITH REGARD TO THE GENUINENESS OR OTHERWISE OF THE GIFTS FROM THE RESPECTIVE PARENTS IN QUESTION, DULY EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE THAT MAY BE ADDUCED BY THE ASSESSEES. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY, AND CONSEQUENTLY, ASSESSEES GROUNDS IN BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 20 . IN THE RESULT, THESE TWO APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES FOR AS SESSMENT YEAR 200 5 - 0 6 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 21. TO SUM UP, WHILE ITA NO.538/HYD/2013 OF M/S. PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05, BEING ITA NOS.539 AND 540 /HYD/2013 ARE TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED AND APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06, BEING ITA NO.54 1 AND 54 7 /HYD/2013 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON JULY 25 , 2014 SD/ - SD/ - ( B.RAMAKOTAIAH ) (A SHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DT/ - 25 TH JU LY , 2014 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. 2. M/S. PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE, 1 - 7 - 695, SUBEDARI, HANAMKONDA 506 001 DR.PREMRAJ SHARMA, C/O. PRITHVI HOSPITAL 1 - 7 - 695, SUBEDARI, HANAMKONDA 506 001 ITA NO. 538 /HYD/201 3 & FOUR OTHERS DR.PREM SHARMA CARDIAC CARE CENTRE & TWO OTHERS, WARANGAL 10 3. DR.NIVEDITA SHARMA, C/O. PRITHVI HOSPITAL 1 - 7 - 695, SUBEDARI, HANAMKONDA 506 001 4 . ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CIRCLE 1 , WARANGAL. 5 . 6. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) 18, MUMBAI. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX(APPEALS) VI HYDERABAD 7 . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX V , HYDERABAD 8 DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S