TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (12) TMI 445
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s found that the minor children of the assessee have received gifts aggregating to Rs. 15,90,000/- from various persons. Although the assessee filed the copies of relevant gift deeds and income-tax returns of the concerned donors, the gifts received by his minor children were treated by the AO as 'unexplained' mainly because of the assessee's failure to produce the donors in order to establish their creditworthiness and genuineness. The aggregate amount of gift of Rs. 15,90,000/- was therefore added by the AO to the total income of the assessee as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 in the assessment completed u/s.147 r.w.s.143(3). In the said assessment, the AO also made an addition of Rs. 1,86,151/- on account of low withdrawal shown by the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment record, it is seen that the AO had asked the appellant's AR to produce the donors but the appellant had failed to produce the donors. Therefore, the appellant had been able to prove the identity of donors but the onus of proving the genuineness of the transactions of gifts and also the credit worthiness of the donors was not discharged in view of failure to produce the donors. The copies of computation of income of the donors are for earlier years and do not reflect their capacity to make gifts during the year under appeal. Reliance in this regard is placed on the Apex court judgment in the case of Sumati Dayal vs. ACIT wherein, the Apex court upheld the action of the AO by applying the principle of human probabilities. Further relianc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 25,000/- per month, there was no justification for the assessee to retract from the said agreement. During the appellate hearing, the AR has not given any reasons as to how the aforesaid estimation at Rs. 25,000/- per month was excessive or unjustified. Considering the order sheet entries and the discussions at the time of assessment proceedings, the additions made by the AO at Rs. 25,000/- deserves to be confirmed. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed." 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal on the following grounds: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appalls) erred in not adjusting the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax returns of the concerned donors, the gifts given to the minor children of the assessee treated by the AO as 'unexplained' as result of the failure of the assessee to produce the concerned donors in order to establish their creditworthiness and genuineness. Although it was specifically submitted on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) that no such opportunity was clearly afforded by the AO to produce the concerned donors either during the course of assessment proceedings or even during the course of remand proceedings, the Ld. CIT (A) appears to have brushed aside the same. On the contrary, he recorded an adverse finding against the assessee on the basis of nonproduction of donors by observing that the onus of proving the genuin....