TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 657
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ground of appeal in assessment year 2002-03 is common with ground No. 2 taken in assessment year 2006-07. In these grounds of appeals, assessee is impugning confirmation of an addition of Rs. 5,21,000 and Rs. 10,36,109 added by the Assessing Officer by disbelieving the claim of gift made by the assessee in assessment years 2002-03 and 2006-07 respectively. 3. The assessment in assessment year 2002-03 has been made under sec. 153A of the Act on the ground that a search under sec. 132 of the Act was carried out upon the assessee on 13.12.2005 whereas assessment in assessment year 2006-07 has been made under sec. 143(3) on 24.12.2007. 4. The brief facts of the case in assessment year 2002-03 are that a notice under sec. 153A of the Act ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....here is no authorization of warrant for carrying out the search in the case of assessee. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ms. Pushpa Rani [2007] 289 ITR 328/[2004] 136 Taxman 627. He pointed out that in this case, ITAT arrived at the conclusion that there was no search warrant in the name of the assessee and, therefore, Assessing Officer could not invoke the provisions of sec. 158-BC for initiating the block assessment. Hon'ble Delhi High Court has upheld this ITAT's order and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. He further relied upon the order of the ITAT in the case of Narendra Kumar Jain v. Dy. CIT [2001] 119 Taxman 213 (Luck.)(Mag.). In this way, he prayed that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the assessee. As far as the issue regarding addition of Rs. 5,21,000 is concerned, an identical issue by a similar finding has been adjudicated upon by the learned CIT (Appeals) in the case of co-sisters Smt. Deepa Bhatia, who has also received a gift of Rs. 5 lacs on the same date from Shri Mukesh Mittal. We have upheld the addition in the case of Mrs. Deepa Bhatia v. Asstt. CIT [2012] 20 taxmann.com 315 (Delhi) Our findings read as under: "11. We have duly considered the rival contention and gone through the records carefully. The money received through gifts though are also credit entries in the books of assessee but still they cannot be equated with any other cash credit and are required to be examined no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are not sufficient for treating such gifts as genuine. In our opinion Ld. CIT(A) has consider the controversy in right perspective and no interference is called for in his finding. Thus ground No. 2 is rejected". 9. Respectfully following our order, we do not find any merit in the appeal of assessee as far as it relates to assessment year 2002-03. The addition of Rs. 5,21,000 is confirmed 10. As far as the addition of Rs. 10,36,159 in assessment year 2006-07 is concerned, this gift has been received by the assessee from her NRI brother. She had produced cash book account exhibiting receipt of Rs. 1,65,000 from Shri Sanjay Bhatia in cash and Rs. 2,32,226 on 10.11.2005, Rs. 3,30,486 on 19.1.2006 and Rs. 3,08,446 again on 19.1.2006. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....certificate indicating the payment of interest as required by law. 12. Appeal to the learned CIT(A) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 13. Learned First Appellate Authority has confirmed the disallowance on some different grounds. In his opinion, assessee was residing with her husband and did not occupy the property for her residence. Thus, assessee is not entitled to claim interest on house loan under sec. 24(b) of the Act. 14. With the assistance of learned representatives, we have gone through the records carefully. The firm M/s. Laxman Dass Bhatia Hingwala is assessed with the same Assessing Officer. The assessee has shown house loan from this firm not disputed by the Assessing Officer. The only grievance of the Assessin....