TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (7) TMI 216
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in taking into consideration the assessee's submissions dated 24.11.2009 in contravention of provision of Rule 46-A." 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer noted that assessee had made investment of Rs.10 lakh in his capital account. The AO was required to furnish the detailed documents with respect to such investment and the AR submitted that the addition to capital account was made through gift received by the assessee from his sister Smt. Chanda Devi Goyal and furnished a copy of gift deed dated 14.3.2007, her income tax return and bank statement of HDFC Bank. The AO also noted that balance of donors Bank account was Rs.41,726 only on 12.3.2007 when Mrs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the evidences, documents and submission of the appellant. The fact is that the appellant has placed on record incontrovertible evidence with regard to "source of source" also, which he was not required to do at all. The moment the appellant had submitted to the AO a copy of the bank statement and other documents of the donor Smt. Chanda Devi, who is a sister of the appellant Shri Shyam Lal Gupta, the onus placed upon the appellant was discharged. He was not required to prove the source of source. However, on the insistence of the AO, he even went to the extent of proving the source of source. Even then, the AO did not believe him and in his misplaced zeal, added the amount to the income of the appellant u/s 68 of the Act, placing reliance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anking channels is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the gift. Since the claim of gift is made by the assessee, the onus lies on him not only to establish the identity of the persons making the gift but also his capacity to make a gift and that it has actually been received as a gift from the donor. Having regard to the inquiries conducted by the Assessing Officer form the bank, with which the assessee was admittedly confronted and bearing in mind the fact that admittedly said Subhash Sethi was not related to the assessee, we are of the view that the findings recorded by the Tribunal are pure findings of fact warranting no interference. We find it difficult to hold that on the facts of the instant case proper opportunity had not be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. of the donor, on page 4 cheque of Rs.10 lakh from donor to donee. Page nos. 5 to 7 are related to business registration in Hong Kong of Shri Anil Gupta, his passport copy and copy of certificate from bank regarding remittance received by donor from her NRI son Shri Anil Gupta. Ld. DR did not dispute above documents. 9. The AR also submitted that the letter on page No.8 was submitted before AO but he did not consider the same but the ld. CIT(A) considered it and held that the assessee succeeded to establish the genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness of the donor. Therefore, he rightly deleted the addition made by the AO on baseless grounds, taking support of surmises and conjectures. Ld. DR supported the order of AO but he ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n. 11. In this case, the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court are being reproduced as under:- "It is true that even after rejecting the explanation given by the assesses if found unacceptable, the crucial aspect whether on the facts and circumstances of the case it should be inferred the sums credited in the books of the assesses constituted income of the previous year must receive the consideration of the authorities provided the assesses rebut the evidence and the inference drawn to reject the explanation offered as unsatisfactory. We are required to notice that section 68 of the Act itself provides, where any sum is found credited in the books of the assessees for any previous year the same may be charged to income tax as the income ....