TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (11) TMI 279
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the addition of Rs. 1,85,000 and Rs. 61,788 made by the AO on account of foreign gifts." 3. The facts in nutshell are that the AO while framing assessment under s. 143(3) noted certain credit entries in the Saving Bank account of the assessee. Some of the entries were successfully explained before the AO. However, with regard to sum of Rs. 1,85,000 credited on 16th Aug., 1993, it was stated on behalf of the assessee that the amount was deposited in the bank out of foreign gifts of US Dollars 6000 and US Dollars 2000 from Shri Mohinder Handa. On being called upon to explain the genuineness of the gift transactions, the assessee furnished a photocopy of cashier's check and also a fax copy of letter from Sh. Mohinder Handa. The AO n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1994 and the same was credited to the Saving Bank account on 20th May, 1994. It was urged that the same did not pertain to the accounting period relevant to the assessment year under consideration. The learned CIT(A) agreed with the contention raised on behalf of the assessee and deleted this addition, as well. 4. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative strongly relied on the assessment order by contending that the additions were wrongly deleted. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that in similar circumstances in the same assessment year, gifts were also received by Sh. Narinder Kumar Sekhri from Sh. Handa and the learned CIT(A) while disposing of the appeal of Sh. Narinder Kumar Sekhri ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore, the learned CIT(A) rightly proceeded to delete the addition. Insofar as the second gift of Rs. 61,788 was concerned, it was stated that the same was received from Sh. Piara Singh Johal. His declaration affirming the gift to Sh. Manoj Kumar was placed at p. 3 of the paper book and similarly copy of cashier's check favouring the assessee of 2450 US Dollars was also shown to us, to have been placed at p. 4 of paper book. It was, therefore, contended that in absence of any material to reject the assessee's explanation, the AO was not justified in making addition and the learned CIT(A) while appreciating the facts had correctly deleted the additions. 6. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant mater....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Sekhri which became subject-matter of consideration by the Tribunal. After considering the facts of the case and also earlier order passed by the Amritsar Bench in ITA No. 947/Asr/1994 in the case of Sh. Satnam Singh Noormahal, the addition was deleted. Since no distinguishing feature has been brought to our notice vis-a-vis Sh. Narinder Kumar Sekhri's case, respectfully following precedent, we confirm the impugned order. Turning to the other addition of Rs. 61,788, it is found that the learned CIT(A) deleted this addition by holding that the credit related to the next assessment year for the reason that the amount credited to the assessee's the bank account was on 20th May, 1994, which falls in the previous year relevant to the....