News Update

Govt scraps ban on export of onionFormer Delhi Congress chief Arvinder Singh Lovely joins BJP with three moreUS Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedGST - Payment of pre-deposit through Form GST DRC-03 instead of the prescribed Form APL-01 - Petitioner attributes it to technical glitches - Respondent is the proper authority to decide the question of fact: HC2nd Session of India-Nigeria Joint Trade Committee held in AbujaGST - Since SCN is bereft of any details and suffers from infirmities that go to the root of the cause, SCN is quashed and set aside: HC1717 candidates to contest elections in phase 4 of Lok Sabha ElectionsGST - Once Appellate Authority comes to the conclusion that SCN was issued by an officer who was not competent; reply was also considered by an incompetent authority and the Competent Authority had not applied its independent mind, Appellate Authority could not have assumed original jurisdiction and proceeded further with the matter: HC7th India-Indonesia Joint Defence Cooperation Committee meeting held in New DelhiGST - Neither the Show Cause Notice nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, therefore, the same cannot be sustained: HCMining sector registers record production in FY 2023-24GST - If the proper officer was of the view that the reply is unclear and unsatisfactory, he could have sought further details by providing such opportunity - Having failed to do so, order cannot be sustained - Matter remanded: HCAnother quake of 6.0 magnitude rocks Philippines; No damage reported so farI-T - Initial burden of proof rested on assessee to substantiate his claim of having incurred expenditure on improvement of property: ITATTrade ban: Israel hits back against Turkey with counter-measuresI-T - Agricultural income can be treated by ITO as undisclosed income in absence of any substantial / corroborative material to prove same: ITATCanada arrests three persons in alleged killing of Sikh separatistI-T - Income from sale of property has to be classified & characterised only in manner of computation as per section 45(2): ITATCus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political events
 
I-T - Cash received as gift cannot be treated as such if donee fails to explain reason for piece-meal deposit of cash amount purportedly received in lump-sum: ITAT

BY TIOL News Service

PUNE, FEB 25, 2019: THE issue at hand before the bench is whether cash claimed to have been received as gift is treatable as such, if the recipient fails to explain the reason behind piece-meal deposit of an amount purportedly received in lump-sum & if there is also a failure to explain the source of such deposits. NO is the answer.

Facts of the case

THE assessee, an individual, furnished return for the relevant AY, declaring income of about Rs 3.4 lakhs. On assessment, the AO noted that the assessee was the proprietor of a firm and that on sales of about Rs 65.15 lakhs, the assessee declared net profit of 6.51% at about Rs 4.2 lakhs. It was also noted that the AO deposited about Rs 13.8 lakhs in cash in a bank. On being asked to explain the source of cash deposits, the assessee claimed that the same were gifts received from her in-laws. Considering the assessee's explanations, the AO opined that the burden placed upon the assessee u/s 69 had not been discharged. Hence the AO made additions of about Rs 10.48 lakhs. On appeal, the CIT(A) noted the assessee's written submissions as well as additional evidence placed & then called for a remand report. Considering the report furnished, the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal. Hence the assessee's appeal.

On appeal, the Tribunal held that,

++ the source of the cash deposit has been explained by the assessee as gift received from her father-in-law Mr Vishwas Vasant Kulkarni of Rs 6,20,000/- and also gift received from her mother-in-law of Rs 9,65,000/-. Against the cash deposit of Rs 12,98,500/-, the assessee points out that she has available cash of Rs 15,85,000/-, they are vis-à-vis gift received from father-in-law and mother-in-law. The assessee was unable to explain as to why the sale proceeds received on 05.04.2006 were deposited in the bank account of assessee between the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008. Similar was the position with regard to gift received from mother-in-law. Before the CIT(A), the assessee pointed out that father-in-law had advanced cash to various persons and when they returned the same after his demise, the amount was handed over to the assessee and was deposited. The perusal of deposits made by the assessee shows that the amounts were deposited in bits and pieces totaling Rs 13,88,500/-. In case the amount was available with the assessee on the sale of properties by her in-laws, then where was the need to deposit the amount in bits and pieces during the month of December, 2007 and thereafter, in March, 2008. Further, the assessee has failed to link the sale proceeds of agricultural land received by her father-in-law with the amounts given as hand loans to various persons. The whole exercise is an afterthought by the assessee and the amount if received after the death of father-in-law should be available with the assessee in lump sum and there was no requirement to deposit the amount in bank in bits and pieces on different dates. There is no merit in the stand of assessee in this regard. Hence, the assessee has failed to explain the source of deposits and in the absence of any evidence linking its claim to the evidences available, the addition made by authorities is upheld in the hands of assessee.

(See 2019-TIOL-519-ITAT-PUNE)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.