A.C.I.T. CIR.16(2), MUMBAI V. SHRI. VIJAY MANSUKHANI, MUMBAI

ITA 6156/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: 615619914 RSA 2008
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D S SUNDER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: M SUBRAMANIAN
• Keywords: Gift; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, B, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI D.K.AGARWAL (JM) AND RAJENDRA SINGH(A .M ) ITA NO.6156/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004-05) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -16(2), MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO ROAD, MUMBAI-400007 VIJAY MANSUKHANI, C-11, SEA PHASE PARK, BHULABHAI DESAI ROAD, MUMBAI-400026 PAN: AACPM1611P APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 11.8.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.8.2011 APPELLANT BY : SHRI D.S.SU NDER SINGH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M SUBRAMANIAN O R D E R PER D.K.AGARWAL (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.7.2008 PASSED BY THE LE ARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE READ AS UNDER : I) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( A) IS JUSTIFIED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.7,00,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED GIFT FOR AY 2004-05? II) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( A) IS JUSTIFIED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED GIFT DISREGARDING THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE AO?. III) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( A) ITA NO.6156/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004-05) 2 HAS ERRED IN LAW IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE SO CA LLED DONOR HAS EXPIRED 7 YEARS BACK AND IN VIEW OF THIS FACT THE GENUINENESS OF THE GIFT IS NOT PROVED? IV) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE HONBLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE DONOR IS NOT RELA TED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE SO CALLED GIFT DOES NOT QUALIF Y TO BE TREATED AS VALID AND LEGITIMATE GIFT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED TH AT THE TAX EFFECT ON THE ABOVE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN RS.3,00,000/-.THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE DID NOT DISPUTE ON THE SAID FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE C ASE. 4 THAT BEING SO AND IN TERMS OF THE RECENT CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 3 OF 2011 DATED 9 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 REPORTED IN (2011) 332 ITR 1 (STATUTES) AND KEEPING IN VIEW THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MADHUKAR K. INAMDAR (HUF) (2009) 318 ITR 148(BOM), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE REVISED MONETARY LIMIT IN THE CIRCULAR DATED MAY 15, 2008 W OULD BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL PENDING APPEALS AND ALSO THE CON SISTENT VIEW OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL, W E ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE APPEAL AND ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO.6156/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2004-05) 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED AS NOT MAINTAINABLE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.8.2011. SD SD (RAJENDRA SINGH) (D.K.AG ARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 11 TH AUGUST, 2011 SRL: COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI