TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1547
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Income Tax, Range-27(1), Mumbai, u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), dated 19.01.2016 for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Grounds taken by the assessee are reproduced as under: 1. The learned CIT ((Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2 crores u/s. 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act without appreciating the fact that the said amount was received as a gift by the appellant from Mr. Anil Kumar Goel on the occasion of his marriage. 2. The learned CIT ((Appeals) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in sustaining the addition of Rs. 11,35,523/- u/s. 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act without appreciating the fact that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....valent to Rs. 11,35,523/-. It was submitted that Shri Siddharth Jatia is a family friend and is from Singapore. For this gift, a cheque vide No.080096, dated 04.12.2012 drawn on Uco Bank, Singapore was gifted vide a gift deed dated 04.12.2012. The said cheque was cleared on 02.01.2013. 2.1. According to the assessee, these gifts were received on the occasion of his marriage and therefore, is exempted under the proviso to section 56(2)(vii). However, according to the ld. Assessing Officer, these gifts were received by the assessee after the occasion of the marriage, based on dates of clearing of cheques and amount getting credited to the bank account of the assessee. He thus, held that these transactions of gift received by the assessee a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 18.12.2012 after the receipt of moneys from Shri Pinku Bagmar and Shri Devki Nandan Gupta. Thus, he concluded that the amounts received by the assessee as gifts are not covered under the proviso to section 56(2)(vii), since the same were not received on the occasion of marriage but much later after the marriage. Ld. Assessing Officer also made an observation that gift received by the assessee was transferred back to Shri Devki Nandan Gupta on 19.12.2012. According to the ld. Assessing Officer, if assessee has received the gift for his marriage, then what was the need for him to transfer the same on the next day to Shri Devki Nandan Gupta. Based on these observations, ld. Assessing Officer concluded that transaction of gift is a sham tran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed on conjectures and surmises without disproving the corroborative documentary evidences placed on record. He also strongly submitted that identity and credit worthiness of both the donors is established beyond any doubts and genuineness of the transaction is also well established. In respect of gifts from Shri Anil Kumar Goel, he referred to his balance sheet as on 31.03.2013, to demonstrate the networth which he carried having total investments in equity shares and other assets totalling to Rs. 131,86,35,212/- with a meagre unsecured loan for credit card of Rs. 14,500/-. From this, it was asserted that Shri Anil Kumar Goel is a high networth individual having his own capital of Rs. 131.88 crores. He also pointed to his income and expend....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grandfather, the same was invested for the purpose of earning interest income which he did earn amounting to Rs. 13,58,772/-. It was also submitted that Shri Devki Nandan Gupta had his own capital of Rs. 19 crores as on 31.03.2013 and there was no need to route the transaction for the purpose of building of capital as alleged by ld. Assessing Officer which is nothing but based on presumption without any basis. 4.3. In respect of the second gift from Shri Siddharth Jatia, ld. Counsel clarified that conclusion drawn by ld. Assessing Officer is based on incorrect fact, since the bank from where the information was called, furnished an incorrect certificate in respect of the impugned transaction. To this effect, ld. Counsel pointed to certif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proviso to section 56(2)(vii) relating to "on the occasion of marriage". The expression "on the occasion of marriage" used in proviso to section 56(2)(vii) cannot be given restricted meaning. When the gift is associated with the event of marriage, the immediate reason or cause for the gift is the marriage of the recipient, it would be covered by the said expression and the relationship between the gift and the marriage is the relevant factor and not the time of making the gift. Proviso to section 56(2)(vii) contains certain events and conditions on which the provisions contained in clause (vii) to section 56(2) shall not apply in respect of any sum of money or any property received by the individual. Clause(b) of the said proviso mentions ....