YAMINI KAPOOR,NEW DELHI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-19, NEW DELHI

ITA 172/DEL/2021

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Yamini Kapoor, a Non-Resident Indian, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) which partly confirmed an assessment order adding Rs. 8,51,000 as unexplained cash deposit. The assessment was based on documents seized during a search operation at the premises of 'Deepak Talwar Group'. The Tribunal admitted an additional ground regarding the lack of valid approval under section 153D of the Act but found that the assessment was passed with prior approval. The main legal contention revolved around whether the cash deposits were exempted gifts from relatives, which are not taxable under section 56(2)(vii) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 22861 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: National Thermal Power Co. Ltd vs. CIT 299 ITR 383, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 vs Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. [2023] 149 taxmann. Com 399(SC), Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs CIT 37 ITR 271(SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNIL YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY AGARWAL
• Keywords: Question of law; Unexplained cash credit; Gift; Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 143(2); 56; 153A; 56(2); 69; 69A

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.172/Del/2021 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Yamini Kapoor C-4, 6 Aurangzeb Road, Central Delhi 110001 Pan No. CPDPK7608J Vs. Deputy Commissioner of income tax Central Circle - 19 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Sanjay Agarwal, CA Respondent by Sh. Sunil Yadav, CIT. DR Date of hearing: 03/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 02/04/2025 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is preferred by the assessee is against the order 11-01-2021 of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 26 E-2 ARA Center Jhandewalan Extension New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] arising out of assessment order dated 31-12-2018 of the of the Asstt. Commissioner of 2 Income tax Central Cirrcle -16 New Delhi, (here in after referred to as Learned (A.O.) for the Assessment Year 2015-16 under section 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [herein after, the Act]. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (hereinafter referred as \"CIT(A)') has erred in law and facts of the case while partly confirming the assessment order passed w/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as \"the act') dated 31.12.2018. 2. That the L.d. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts while confirming the addition of Rs. 8,51,000/-on account of unexplained cash deposit u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the act, while the appellant left no stone unturned to give the lawful evidence of receipt of such amount during the appeal proceedings and no incriminating material to substantiate the confirmation of impugned addition were found by the Ld. CIT(A), hence the confirming the addition 3 for Rs. 8,51,000/-without appreciating the evidence furnished and without producing any incriminating material been found in this regard is bad in law and may please be deleted. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts while confirming the addition of/Rs. 8,51,000/-on account of unexplained cash deposit u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the act, while not appreciating that the appellant has received the impugned amount as a gift in her bank account from her relatives and as per provisions laid in Sec 56(2)(vii) of the act the gifts received from relatives is not taxable in the hand of the recipient, hence the confirming such addition for Rs. 8.51,000/- is bad in law and may please be deleted. 4. The assessee craves to add, alter, delete, modify or withdraw any of the above grounds at the time of hearing. 4 4. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant/ assessee is a Non-Resident Indian. A search and seizure operation were carried out at the business/residential premise of “Deepak Talwar Group” on 22-06-2016 and during the course of search certain documents belonging to the assessee were seized. On the basis of the documents, proceedings were initiated in the case of assessee u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Act. A notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued on 20-11-2018 and the assessee filed return of income in the response of the notice declaring total income of Rs.1,13,770/-. Subsequently notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. In the response of the notice the authorized representative attended the proceeding. The Learned A.O has completed the assessment by making the additions as under: (i) Addition on unexplained cash deposit u/s 69 A r.w.s.115 BBE of the Act Rs 8,51,000/- (ii) Addition on unexplained money credited u/s 69 A r.w.s. 115 BBE of the Act Rs 84,00,000/-. 5 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Learned A.O. the assessee has filed this appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his order dated 11-01-2021 partly allowed the appeal and the addition made by the A.O. u/s 69A of the Act towards unexplained credits was deleted and rest was confirmed, against which the assessee is in appeal before the tribunal. 6. The Ld A.R of the assessee has moved the application to raised the additional ground in the appeal. He also submitted that the ground raised by assessee is legal ground and which can be raised at any time. Reliance has been placed on the decision of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd vs. CIT 299 ITR 383, in this case the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that “where the Tribunal is only required to consider the question of law arising from facts which are on record in the assessment proceedings, there is no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability. In the light of the Hon’ble 6 Supreme Court decision the additional ground raised by assessee is admitted for adjudication. 7. Additional Ground: the assessee has raised the ground that no valid approval has been obtained u/s153D of the Act. Perusal of the order of learned A.O reveals that that assessment order was passed with prior approval of the Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, central Range -4 New Delhi, which was obtained by the learned A.O. The assessment order was passed with the prior approval. The ground raised by the assessee is decided against the assessee. 8 Ground No 1: the ld AR of the assessee has stated that no incriminating documents were found therefore no addition can be made in the absence of the incriminating material. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-3 vs Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. [2023] 149 taxmann. Com 399(SC). The Ld AR also submitted that the assessee has received the gift from her relatives and family members. He has further submitted that gift received from the 7 family members, relatives do not come under the purview of the income tax and exempted for the tax. He has stated that there is no column available in the ITR to declared the gift items. The suspicion cannot take place of proof. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Umacharan Shaw & Bros vs CIT 37 ITR 271(SC). 9. In the present case the assessee deposited cash around Rs 851000/- in her bank account. The assessee claimed that the cash deposit was out of the gifts received by the assessee from close relatives on various occasions like marriage in family Birthday, Raksha Bandhan, Diwali etc. The assessee has stated that these are the exempted gifts as per the section 56(2) of the Act. 10. The relevant extract of section 56 of the Act is produced as under: \"56(1). (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-section (1), the 8 following incomes, shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head \"Income from other sources\", namely:- vi) where any sum of money, the aggregate value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, is received without consideration, by an individual or a Hindu undivided family, in any previous year from any person or persons on or after the 1st day of April, 2006 but before the 1st day of October, 2009, the whole of the aggregate value of such sum: Provided that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money received- (a) from any relative; or (b) on the occasion of the marriage of the individual; or (c) under a will or by way of inheritance; or (d) in contemplation of death of the payer; or (e) from any local authority as defined in the Explanation to clause (20) of section 10; or 9 (f) from any fund or foundation or university or other educational institution or hospital or other medical institution or any trust or institution referred to in clause (23C) of section 10; or (g) from any trust or institution registered under section 12AA. Explanation. -For the purposes of this clause, \"relative\" means- (i) spouse of the individual; (ii) brother or sister of the individual; (iii) brother or sister of the spouse of the individual; (iv) brother or sister of either of the parents of the individual; (v) any lineal ascendant or descendant of the individual; (vi) any lineal ascendant or descendant of the spouse of the individual; 10 (vii) spouse of the person referred to in clauses (ii) to (vi);\" 11. The assessee has submitted the details of the donors along with the cash amounts received on various occasions to prove that are the exempted gifts were provided to the assessee. In India it is customary to give the gift on the occasion of the marriage anniversary, Diwali, birthday and other festival etc. The assessee claimed the cash which have received on various dates and have been deposited on various dates in cash amounts below Rs 50,000/- except the entry of Rs 3,50,000/- which was deposited by Shri Sandeep Sharma in her account are customary exempted gifts. The assessee has failed to explain why the amount of Rs.3,50,000/- was deposited by Sh. Sandeep Sharma in her bank account. If the assessee has received customary gifts on the birthday, festivals and family functions then such cash amounts would have been deposited by the assessee every year. The assessee has failed to explain 11 that all amount deposited in her bank account was the customary exempted gift given by her relatives. 12. Considering the facts of the case we accept the contention of the assessee to the extent, the half amount which was deposited in her bank account as customary exempted gift given by her relatives. The half amount of the addition made by A.O is deserves to be deleted, by treated as customary exempted gift and in terms of above, appeal of the assessee deserves to be partly allowed. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 02.04.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *Neha, SR. PS * Date: 02.04.2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) ` 5. DR: ITAT "