TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 326
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titioner was nothing but contributions received by way of gifts by the petitioner from various persons, proof of which had been adduced before the first appellate authority i.e. the CIT(A) who had on a proper appreciation of the facts de1eted the addition? II) Whether the order of the Learned Tribunal giving a complete gobye to the findings of the CIT(A) and thereafter confirming the order of the Assessing Officer was perverse? Briefly stated the facts and circumstances of the case are as follows:- The assessee an individual, filed his return of income for the assessment year 1996-97 indicating therein a total income of Rs. 42,760/-, which was processed u/s.143(1)(a). Upon examining the return filed for the assessment year 1995-96 the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'the AO') observed that the closing stock appearing in the Trading and Profit and Loss Account for the year ended on 31st March 1995 was Rs. 85,960/- whereas the opening stock appearing in the Trading and Profit and Loss Account for the year ended on 31st March 1996 was Rs. 1,35,960/-. Hence there was a difference of Rs. 50,000/-. Similarly, the closing capital in the Balance-Sheet as at 31st March 1995....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relatives and others which was mentioned in the personal balance sheet. After verifying the gifts and sources of the donors the assessing officer reported as under:- "In case of Rani Bala Bhattacharya (Donor) The donor is the mother of the assessee. She made a statement in response to notice u/s 131 that she made gift Rs. 85,000/- in several dates in cash (copy of statement against 131 enclosed herewith). The 2 source of fund were out of sold of her agricultural land in favour of the same, she submitted some copy of land deed. She has not any IT file. In case of Manasi Metia (Donor) The donor is wife of the assessee and she is a schoolmistress 85 IT file is available. She made a statement in response to notice u/s 131 (copy enclosed) were she stated that she made gift Rs. 65,000/- to her husband in cash in various date out of his salary income. In case of Haridas Sinha [Donor] The donor is brother-in-law in relation of the assessee. He declared in the statement in response to notice u/s 131 (copy of statement enclosed) that he made gift Rs. 40,000/- in cash in several dates to Sri Prahallad Bhattacharya out of his pension & MIS income. The donor is an ex-employee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce the addition of Rs. 2,40,000/- is deleted. As regards balance amount of Rs. 86,550/- (i.e. 3,26,550 - 2,40,000) the A. R. argued that the appellant had income from profession since 31.3.80 and the accumulated capital was introduced in one year. I have considered the argument and I find that the A. R. could not produce any evidence of professional income since 1980 except filing a Chart. Hence the addition of Rs. 86,500/- is held to be justified." The assessee and the revenue both appealed against the order of the CIT(A) before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by an order dated 29th April, 2004 confirmed the addition of Rs. 2,40,000/- which was previously deleted by the CIT(A), the addition of Rs. 86,550/- and Rs. 50,000/- were also upheld. The Tribunal held as follows:- "We have seen from the record that the assessee never filed any personal balance sheet till assessment year 1998-99. The theory of opening capital and the gift was introduced first time before the CIT(A) in which it was explained that the assessee allegedly received certain donations from most unlikely source. (a) In the case of Smt. Rani Bala Bhattacharya, who is the mother of the assessee, the donor is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hout any reason, deleted the addition; of Rs. 2,40,000/- which is not sustainable. 7. Regarding the opening balance also since the assessee never provided any personal balance sheet till 1998-99, the theory of opening balance in the capital account has remained a myth and cannot be taken for granted. Therefore, we observe that this entire addition made by the AO is on the correct basis and/ or evaluation of the facts on record which the CIT(A) should not .have interfere with Reversing the order of CIT(A), we confirm the addition of Rs. 2,40,000 and agreeing with the order of CIT(A), we uphold the addition of Rs. 86,550/- being unexplained opening balance. 8. In the result, the assessee's appeal is dismissed and the departmental appeal is allowed." The assessee has come up in appeal against the impugned order of the Tribunal. Mr. Ananda Sen, learned advocate appearing for the assessee contended that genuineness of a gift received from a blood relation should not be doubted. In support of his submission he relied on the judgement of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT-vs- Suresh Kumar Kakar reported in (2010) 324 ITR 231 for the proposition that when the donor and the do....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ected to disclose or answer any question which was not specifically put to him in the course of proceedings u/s.131. The inspector deputed by the assessing officer had full opportunity to make inquiry and the assessee should not suffer on account of a lapse on the part of the inspector. It is no doubt true that in an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) the Tribunal being the final fact finding authority has full power to review the evidence and to reach its own independent conclusion. Nevertheless while reversing the order of the CIT(A) the Tribunal is duty bound to examine and discuss the reasons given by the CIT(A) to hold one way or the other and then to dispel those reasons. If the Tribunal fails to make such an exercise the judgment will suffer from serious infirmity. We are supported in our view by the following judgments of the Supreme Court. In Padma Uppal v. State of Punjab, reported in (1977) 1 SCC 330 wherein the Apex Court while discussing the scope of appellate power held as follows:- "Moreover, there is a prudent condition to which the appellate power, generally speaking is subject. A Court of appeal interferes not when the judgment under attack is not right but....