TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Cancels Income Tax Penalties for Genuine Gifts, Emphasizes Natural Love and Affection</h1> <h3>Leelaben Labhubhai Lakhani Versus ITO, Ward-9 (2), Surat</h3> Leelaben Labhubhai Lakhani Versus ITO, Ward-9 (2), Surat - TMI Issues: Validity of penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for assessment years 2000-2001 and 2003-2004.Analysis:1. Assessment Year 2000-2001:- The issue in this appeal was the validity of the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs. 12,000. The assessee claimed to have received a gift from her father out of natural love and affection. The AO rejected the explanation provided by the assessee for not proving the credit-worthiness of the donor. The Tribunal held that the relationship between the donor and the assessee was that of father and daughter, and the natural love and affection could not be doubted. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee's explanation was bona fide, and the penalty was not justified. The penalty under section 271(1)(c) was canceled, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.2. Assessment Year 2003-2004:- The issue in this appeal was the validity of the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) amounting to Rs. 95,650. The assessee claimed to have received gifts from close relatives totaling Rs. 3,03,651. The Tribunal noted that the gifts were made by close relatives, indicating natural love and affection. The Tribunal held that the assessee had disclosed all material facts necessary for assessment and that the explanation provided was bona fide. The Tribunal concluded that the penalty was not justified merely because the credit-worthiness of the donors was not proven. Therefore, the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was canceled, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.In both cases, the Tribunal emphasized that the imposition of the penalty under section 271(1)(c) was not warranted as the facts did not justify it. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of proving credit-worthiness but also considered the genuine nature of relationships and gifts received. The appeals of the assessee were allowed in both instances, and the penalties were canceled.
TaxTMI 