2014 (9) TMI 1079 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal partially allows Assessee's appeals on gifts & directs re-evaluation of deductions.

Uma Sankar Agarwal Versus DCIT, Circle-51, Kolkata

The appeals filed by the Assessee were partly allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the addition of ... Reopening of assessment - ingenuity of gift - Held that:- A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the donors had appeared in response to the notice under section 131 and confirmed giving gifts to the assessee’s minor son. This being so as also on account of the fact that the gifts had been given by a/c. payee cheques and the amount of gifts being nominal thus the addition, as made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) in respect of gifts received by the assessee’s minor son for the relevant assessment year from the four donors, stands deleted. Statutory deduction under section 24(a) of the Act in respect of rental income assessable under the head “Income from house property” - Held that:- We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the AO has denied the benefit of deduction under section 24(a) on the ground that the assessee has not claimed the benefit in the return filed under section 148 and on the ground that the rent from land is not eligible for deduction under section 24(a), this issue is restored to the file of the AO for re-adjudication. It is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has also not adjudicated on the issue. In these circumstances, this issue is restored to the file of the AO for re-adjudication. If the assessee is entitled to the benefit of deduction and complies with the statutory requirement, the assessee should be granted benefit of the deduction. Issues involved:1. Reopening of assessment2. Addition of gifts received by assessee's minor son3. Disallowance of traveling expenses4. Confirmation of statutory deduction under section 24(a)5. Challenge against invocation of provisions of section 2636. Addition of gifts received by assessee's minor son7. Non-allowance of statutory deductions under section 24(b) and 24(a)Analysis:Issue 1 - Reopening of assessment:The appeal was against the reopening of the assessment. The assessee did not provide any submissions regarding this issue, leading to its dismissal.Issue 2 - Addition of gifts received by assessee's minor son:The assessee contested the addition of gifts received by the minor son, arguing that the donors had confirmed the gifts before the AO. The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, noting that the gifts were given through a/c. payee cheques and were nominal. Citing a previous Tribunal decision, the addition was deleted.Issue 3 - Disallowance of traveling expenses:The traveling expenses incurred by the assessee for a business tour to Bangkok were disallowed by the AO. The assessee did not provide substantial arguments in this regard, resulting in the dismissal of this ground.Issue 4 - Confirmation of statutory deduction under section 24(a):The issue was related to the confirmation of statutory deduction under section 24(a) for rental income from house property. Both parties agreed that this issue required re-adjudication by the AO, as the AO had denied the deduction on technical grounds. The Tribunal directed the issue to be restored to the AO for re-evaluation.Issue 5 - Challenge against invocation of provisions of section 263:The challenge against the invocation of section 263 was dismissed as the assessment order was consequential to the order under section 263, making it inappropriate to challenge in the current appeal.Issue 6 - Non-allowance of statutory deductions under section 24(b) and 24(a):Similar to the issue in ITA No.449/Kol/2012, the non-allowance of statutory deductions under sections 24(b) and 24(a) was raised. The Tribunal, following the same reasoning, restored these issues to the AO for re-adjudication.In conclusion, the appeals filed by the Assessee were partly allowed for statistical purposes, with specific issues being decided in favor of the assessee and others being referred back to the AO for re-evaluation.