Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20.10.2011 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Shimla [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] agitating the addition of Rs. 1 lac made into the income of the assessee by the Assessing Officer, as unexplained deposit, into the account of the assessee.
-Chd-2011 Dr. S.P.S.Thakur, Hamirpur 2 2. The plea of the assessee has been that the said amount of Rs. 1 lac was received by the assessee through cheque from his daughter as gift.
Further, the source of the said amount was also explained that the said amount was received by his daughter, Dr. Richa Thakur from her mother-in-law through banking channel out of amount of the accident claim of Dr. Richa’s first husband. The assessee could not produce his daughter Dr. Richa Thakur for statement before the Assessing Officer as she was settled at USA. The Assessing Officer, therefore, concluded that the assessee could not satisfactorily prove that the said amount was received as gift from his daughter. He, accordingly treated the said amount as unaccounted income of the assessee and added the same to the returned income of the assessee.
Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of appellant-assessee observing that the wife of the assessee namely Smt. Pratima had also received an amount of Rs. 60,000/- as gift from her daughter Dr. Richa Thakur. He observed that under normal circumstances the father do not accept gift from his daughter. He accordingly held that the said amount was unaccounted income of the assessee routed through the account of his daughter.
Being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has come in appeal before us. -Chd-2011 Dr. S.P.S.Thakur, Hamirpur 3 5 We have heard the rival contentions of the Ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties and gone through the record. The appellant moved an application for admission of additional evidences on record i.e. the copy of the passport to prove that his daughter has been settled at USA and further the copy of the bank account of Dr. Richa has been produced to show that the said amount was received through banking channel from Dr. Richa by the assessee.
The above stated evidences, in our view, do not partake the character of additional evidences. The fact that the daughter of the assessee Dr. Richa Thakur has been settled at USA and that the amount of Rs. 1 lac received through cheque by the assessee from his daughter are already on the record and have not been controverted or denied by the Revenue. Under the circumstances, the evidences furnished by the appellant do not constitute additional evidence. Though, a request has been made to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the case afresh in the light of the aforesaid evidences, however, after going through the record and the aforesaid evidences sought to be produced, we do not think that any useful purpose will be served by remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer.
Now coming to the merits of the case. The addition has been confirmed by the CIT(A) only on the basis of assumption that a father will not take a gift from his daughter, however, as per the provisions of -Chd-2011 Dr. S.P.S.Thakur, Hamirpur 4 section 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), the father and daughter comes in the definition of relatives and there is no bar for giving or taking gift inter se by them. The amount has been transferred to the account of the assessee from bank account of the daughter of the assessee. It has also not been disputed that the daughter of the assessee namely Dr. Richa has been settled at USA, therefore, the assessee could not produce her before the Assessing Officer. The assessee has further explained the source of the donor also that the said amount was received by his daughter from her mother-in-law on account of accident claim of her former husband.
Considering the above circumstances, we do not find any justification on the part of the CIT(A) to disbelieve the claim of the assessee on the basis that the daughter of the assessee has also gifted some money to her mother also. May it be so, that is to be seen in the assessment of the income of the wife of the assessee but that fact has no relevancy so far as the facts of the present case are concerned. The claim of the assessee has been denied by the CIT(A) merely on the basis of assumption, which, in our view, is not justified. In our view, the assessee has duly proved the source of deposit which admittedly has been transferred in to the account of the assessee though banking channel from the account of his daughter. In view of this, we do not -Chd-2011 Dr. S.P.S.Thakur, Hamirpur 5 find any merit in the order of the CIT(A) and the same is accordingly set aside and the impugned additions stand deleted.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed Order pronounced on 10.8.2020.