Shri Piyush C. Vasoya, RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 587/RJT/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7662 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS NAMITA KHURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: MJ RANPURA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Gift; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 68; 6

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH E COURT AT AHMEDABAD] BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.587/RJT/2014 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2010-11 SHRI PIYUSH CHANDUBHAI VASOYA SHRI RAM, 1-GURUDEV PARK B/H. AMARNATH TEMPLE 150FEET RING ROAD RAJKOT 360 005. VS. ITO, WARD - 1(3) RAJKOT. ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.J. RANPURA, AR REVENUE BY : MRS.NAMITA KHURANA, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 16/07/2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15/10/2019 +,/ O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST O RDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-1, RAJKOT DATED 6.8.2014 PASSED FOR THE A SSTT.YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN NINE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, H OWEVER, HIS GRIEVANCE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE AD DITION OF RS.42,79,300/- WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE AO WITH THE AID OF SECTION 6 8 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 17.2.2011 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1, 48,670/-. THE CASE OF THE ITA NO.587/RJT/2014 2 ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT. IT REVEALED TO THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS OPERATING A SAVING BANK ACCOUNT BEARIN G NO.03791000040888 WITH HDFC BANK, KALAWAD ROAD BRANCH, RAJKOT. HE FO UND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH DEPOSIT AGGREGATING TO RS.72,55, 000/-. THE LD.AO DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS MADE TO THE BANK. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS EXPLANATION AND THE LD.AO WA S BROADLY SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE EXCEPT FOR THREE AM OUNTS, VIZ. (A) GIFT RECEIVED FROM GRAND-PARENTS : RS.15,00,00 0/- (B) CASH DEPOSITS BY JOIN ACCOUNT HOLDER: RS.26,5 0,000/- SMT.RITABEN C. VASOYA (C) UNSECURED LOAN : RS.1,29,300/- TOTAL ADDITION : RS.42,79,300/- THE LD.AO HAS MADE ADDITION OF THE AMOUNT. APPEAL TO THE CIT(A) DID NOT BRING ANY RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD.REPRESENTATIVES, W E HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. SHRI GOVIND VASOYA AND SMT.JADIB EN BHIMJIBHAI BALDHA EXECUTED GIFT DEED ON A STAMP PAPER OF RS.50/-, AND THIS CONFIRMATION-CUM- GIFT DEED WAS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE L D.AO. ACCORDING TO THE DECLARATION MADE BY BOTH THE DEPONENT, IT WAS ALLEG ED THAT THEY HAVE PAID RS.7,50,000/- IN CASH EACH TO THEIR GRANDSON. HE D IRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE BOTH THE DONORS. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SHR I GOVIND VASOYA HAS DIED AND DEATH CERTIFICATE WAS SUBMITTED. WITH REGARD T O SMT.DUDHIBEN G. VASOYA, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT SHE WAS OLD AND UNABL E TO WALK THROUGH. IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO ATTEND PROCEEDINGS. THE LD.AO REJE CTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT GIFT DEED WAS NOT EXECU TED IN CONSONANCE WITH RULES AND REGULATIONS. IT IS BY WAY OF SIMPLE NARR ATION. IT IS NOT ATTESTED. ITA NO.587/RJT/2014 3 DONORS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE THEIR CAPACITY TO DONA TE THIS AMOUNT. THE LD.CIT(A) CONCURRED WITH THE OBSERVATION OF THE AO. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT BOTH THE DONORS WERE RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE BEING GRANDPARENTS. THEY W ERE HAVING AGRICULTURE LAND AND PAST SAVINGS. OUT OF WHICH, THEY HAVE GIVEN TH IS AMOUNT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.DR POINTED OUT THAT THE LAND HOLDING WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO GENERATE THIS MUCH INCOME TO THE DONORS, AND THEY HAVE NOT FILED SUPPORTING EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE AGRICULTURE OPERATIONS. 6. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT GRANDPARENTS ONE OF WHOM DIED AFTER E XECUTION OF THE GIFT DEED, AND BEFORE APPEARING BEFORE THE AO, THEY HAVE DECLA RED THAT THEY HAVE GIFTED A SUM OF RS.7,50,000/- EACH TO THEIR GRANDSON. IT IS NOT A GIFT WHICH IS ARRANGED FROM UNKNOWN PERSON. THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME SORTS OF ASSETS WHICH COULD BE INHERITED BY DIFFERENT PARTIES, AND SOME O F THEM MUST HAVE ARRANGED THE CASH. THOUGH THERE IS NO SPECIFIC EVIDENCE WIT H REGARD TO THE REASONING, BUT WHATEVER GIFTS FROM DIRECT BLOOD RELATIONS ARE BEING VISUALIZED, THEN WE HAVE TO APPRECIATE THEM FROM SOCIAL AND FAMILY CIRC UMSTANCES. THESE GIFTS CANNOT BE VISUALIZED WITH AN ANGLE WHERE GIFTS ARE BEING ALLEGED TO BE RECEIVED FROM UNKNOWN PERSONS. THEREFORE, WE ARE O F THE VIEW THAT AT THE FAG- END OF THEIR LIFE, THEIR GRANDPARENTS MIGHT HA VE DONATED A SUM OF RS.15 LAKHS TO THEIR GRANDSONS. WE DELETE THE ADDITION O F RS.15 LAKHS. 7. NEXT ITEM OF ADDITION OF RS.26,50,000/- RECEIVED FROM SMT.RITABEN C. VASOYA, A JOINT ACCOUNT HOLDER AND SISTER OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, SHE HAS CONTRIBUTED A N AMOUNT OF RS.26,50,000/- AND DECLARATION TO THIS EFFECT WAS S UBMITTED. THE LD.REVENUE ITA NO.587/RJT/2014 4 AUTHORITIES HAVE REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE AS SESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT SHE FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF SUCH AMOUNT. TO OU R MIND, THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IF A JOINT AC COUNT HOLDER OWNS UP A PARTICULAR TRANSACTION BY FILING A CONFIRMATION AND AFFIDAVIT, THEN THAT QUESTION IS TO BE EXAMINED IN HER CASE. IN OTHER WORDS, IT SHOULD BE INQUIRED IN THE CASE OF SMT.RITABEN C. VASOYA AND NOT FROM THE ASSESSEE. FOR A JOINT ACCOUNT BOTH THE CO-OWNERS ARE EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE, AND IF A PLA USIBLE EXPLANATION IS GIVEN, THEN THAT EXPLANATION CANNOT BE REJECTED ON THE GRO UND THAT OTHER CO-HOLDER WAS NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT FUND. IF THAT BE SO, THE N ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT SHOULD B E MADE IN THE HANDS OF OTHER CO-OWNER. HOW, THE ASSESSEE CAN BE FASTENED WITH LIABILITY ? WHEN THE CO-OWNER HAS OWNED UP THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE ACCOU NT, IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE MAD E. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW THIS FOLD GRIEVANCE AND DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 26,50,000/-. 9. AS FAR AS A SUM OF RS.1,29,300/- IS CONCERNED, N O EXPLANATION WAS GIVEN TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE IDENTITY AND CAPACITY OF THE PERSONS FROM WHOM THIS AMOUNT HAS BEEN TAKEN. THEREFORE, T HIS GROUND OF REJECTED, AND THIS ADDITION IS CONFIRMED. 10. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15 TH OCTOBER, 2019 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 15/10/2019