TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (4) TMI 398
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on wrong assumption and contrary conjecture to the real facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)-2 erred in appreciating the addition of Rs. 5,00,000 of unexplained source of marriage gifts received on the of marriage of the appellant from relatives. The gift received were pertain to the A.Y. 2009-10. The addition was illegal and was also contrary to the real facts and against the law therefore the addition kindly may be deleted and quested. 3. The Ld. CIT(Appeal)-2 failed to appreciate the findings of Ld. AO ward 5(2), Jaipur, in his remand report dated 09.10.2019, that "The Affidavits produced in the shape of evidences submitted by the A.R. of the Assessee, appear to the genuine and the sources of cash deposit appears to be explained" 2. Briefl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... huge cash gifts are customary. 4. It was submitted that the AO doubted the cash gifts of Rs. 5,00,000/- received by the assessee from her grand mother-in-law, Asharfi Devi, and her great grand-mother-in-law, Kampoori Devi. He held that the donors are non tax payers and do not have any source of income and also do not maintain any bank account. The AO has based his conclusion on surmises and conjectures. He was told that the donors have regular income from sale of milk and cattle feed. It may be mentioned that the Ld.AO before making the impugned addition did not even issue a show cause notice in this regard. Had he done so, the assessee would have adduced further evidence to substantiate her stand. The AO disbelieved the evidence and subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e(s) of sub-creditors. With the production of gift deed and identity of the donors and the genuineness of the transaction (gift on marriage) the assessee had discharged initial onus placed on her. In the event, the revenue still had a doubt with regard to the genuineness of the transactions in issue, or as regards the creditworthiness of the donors, it would have had to discharge the onus which had shifted on to it. A bald assertion by the CIT(A) that the credit worthiness of the donors remained unverified and simply on the basis of affidavit, gift shown cannot be accepted as genuine is a long drawn conclusion, and is of no avail. The revenue was required to prove this allegation. An allegation by itself which is based on assumption will n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the Revenue in the circumstances to challenge the correctness of the statement made by the deponent made by the deponent in the affidavit. In other words, consequently the assessee was entitled assume that the authorities were satisfied with the affidavit as sufficient proof on this point. 8. It was submitted that the assessee would also like to rely on the decision on similar lines rendered by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Silver Streak Trading Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 326 ITR 418. Further, the Allahabad High Court in the case of L. Sohanlal Gupta vs. CIT(1958) 33 ITR 786 was confronted with the question of rejection of affidavits. The Hon'ble High Court held that rejection of affidavits is not justified unless assessee has either....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eiving the affidavit of the accountant, the Income Tax Officer, without giving any notice and without holding any enquiry, straightaway reached the conclusion that the statement in the affidavit was false and held the petitioners personally liable under clause (vi). Although the Income Tax Officer did set out in the notice dated December 31,1966 the reasons for reaching this conclusion he did not offer any opportunity to the petitioners to show that the reasons that weighed with him were not correct. His decision was therefore invalid. Notice dated December 31,1966 and January 11, 1967 must therefore be set aside. In view of the above submission and the case laws which are squarely applicable to the case of the assessee, it was submitted t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer for his comments. Vide remand report dated 21.10.2019, Assessing Officer stated that they cannot be verified due to death of donors and according to him they appear to be genuine. However the creditworthiness of the donors remained unverified. 2.5.2. On perusal of above report, I find that in support of gift, assessee filed only affidavit of father in law of assessee which is self serving and not supported by any bank account, nor was there any evidence of source of donors. Therefore, simply on basis of this affidavit, gift shown cannot be accepted as genuine. Therefore, the addition made is hereby confirmed. These grounds of appeal are dismissed. 11. Further, ld. DR has relied upon the following decisions:- * M/s Nova Promoters....