TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act in the hands of the Appellant ?" 2. The learned Counsel submits that even if the Appellant was unable to prove the exact ingredients of a gift, still this was not the case which could have been brought within the purview of this section. The Tribunal as also the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) were in complete error and therefore, the order is perverse. They have proceeded on the footing that the Appellant - assessee has failed to prove the love and affection between her and the donor. In such circumstances and when the Delhi High Court and Rajasthan High Court in the decisions in the cases of "Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. R.S.Sibal" reported in "(2004) 269 ITR 429 (Delhi)" and "Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Padam Singh Chou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a result of that the remittance came. In such circumstances, this would not be a case of genuine gift. It is in that context that all the three Authorities have concurrently found that the Appellant - assessee has failed to establish the essential ingredients of gift. They have not probed the gift or the aspect of natural love and affection as contended by the learned Counsel. While examining the details and scrutinising the necessary documents which have been given by the Assessee that the Authirities have concurrently found that the whole transaction was camouflage of business relation between assessee's husband and the alleged donor. This is not the case which could be said to be covered by the ratio laid down by Delhi High Court. I....