TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (3) TMI 274
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... material facts for the disposal of this ground of appeal are that during the assessment proceedings, the AO noted from the cash flow statement of the assessee that the assessee has received gifts of Rs. 45,762 and Rs. 46,504 from Shri Parmod Kumar Jolly through demand drafts issued from England. The AO asked the assessee to furnish confirmation and details of the foreign gifts and in response thereto, the assessee furnished affidavit of Shri Parmod Kumar Jully. In his affidavit, he stated that he made the gifts of £ 2,000 vide two demand drafts dt. 28th July, 1993 and 21st Oct., 1993 for £ 1,000 each drawn on Bank of England. The AO treated this amount received by the assessee as gifts, as income of the assessee from undisclosed sources ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee after conversion, was also filed. He further contended that the AO has disbelieved the gifts under wrong notion that the donor is residing in India. The disbelief is based simply on non-submission of the address of the donor in India. As the donor was a British resident, he has no residential address in India. In case the AO wanted to seek any clarification or conformation, he would have done so by writing directly to the donor but no such effort has been made for arriving at the genuineness of the gifts and this addition has been made by the AO arbitrarily, and so the same is required to be deleted. The CIT(A) finding force in the submissions of the assessee, deleted the impugned addition made by the AO. Aggrieved with the order of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmod Kumar Jolly was on vacation trip to India and happened to be at Ambala on that date. However, complete address of the donor mentioned in the affidavit was that of U.K. and the AO was also informed in this written reply that in case the AO wanted to confirm the contents of the affidavit, he can directly communicate with the donor at his residential address given in the affidavit. He further submitted that after this reply filed by the assessee before the AO, the AO has neither sought any clarification from the assessee nor entered into any communication with the donor but has wrongly concluded that the gifts given by Shri Parmod Kumar Jolly to the assessee were not genuine and has wrongly added back this amount to the income of the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion that merely because there is a contradiction in the observations of the CIT(A), that before him the assessee has submitted that the donor is his uncle whereas in the affidavit, the donor has mentioned to be his cousin/friend. In our opinion, it is not sufficient enough to disbelieve the genuineness of these gifts merely because of this small contradiction because even from this contradiction, it cannot be ruled out that the assessee is related to the donor and also because of some facts appearing in this case to judge the genuineness of the gifts which we would be discussing thereinbelow in our order. 2.5 We find that the assessee has filed an affidavit of the donor confirming the amounts of gifts made to the assessee. The assessee i....