TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 1160
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....framing the assessment, the Assessing Officer (AO) made the disallowance of gift of Rs. 11,00,000/- and further made the addition of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of Rs. 5,49,500/-,in assessment order dated 16.12.2008. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A) but without any success. Thus, this second appeal is filed before us u/s. 253 of the Act. 3. We have heard the Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) of the assessee and the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for Revenue and perused the material available on record. The Ld. AR for assessee argued that the assessee received gift of Rs. 10,00,000/- from his brother. Assessee furnished the copy of NRE Bank A/c in India from which Rs. 10,00,000/- was cr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....withdrew the cash from his bank account. The Revenue authorities disputed the genuinity of the transaction. On the other hand the ld. DR for Revenue argued that the assessee has not filed any proof regarding marriage of her son. It was argued that, if the purpose of marriage was not fulfilled then the amount should have been deposited in the Bank immediately. The huge cash transaction was against of possible probabilities and thus, the findings of authorities below are in accordance with the provisions of law. 4. We have considered the rival contentions of the parties and gone through the order of authorities below including the document placed on record. The AO while framing the assessment observed that assessee has received gift of Rs. 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....With regard to cash deposit of Rs. 5,49,500/- on various dates in United Bank of India & HDFC Bank, the assessee was asked to furnish source of cash transaction. The AO concluded that assessee is non-co-operative and did not offer any explanation. The source of cash transaction is not proved, thus, the entire deposit was treated u/s 68 of the Act. During the first appellate stage, the similar submission and contention were raised before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). While considering the contention of the assessee with regard to gift of Rs. 10,00,000/-, the ld. CIT(A) concluded that the donor/Gopal Chabria is residing at Dubai from last 24 years and settled there. The donor confirmed that a gift of Rs. 10,00,000/- was given to his co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of the Revenue is that the amount was deposited just prior to issuance of cheque. Mere suspicion of the Revenue that the amount was deposited just before the issuance of cheque cannot be a ground for rejection of claim/gift where capacity of the donor and the identity is not in dispute. Thus, we delete the addition of Rs. 1,00,000/-. We have observed that the ld CIT(A) while disposing the appeal of the assessee, instead of examining the gift from the angel of section 68 of the Act, examined the same under section 56 of the Act. The ld CIT(A) concluded that cousin sister did not fall under the category of 'relative' as per explanation attached with section 56(2) (v) and therefore the impugned gift is liable to be taxed under this section.....