GAURAV SHARMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 25.05.2011 #54 . Present: Mr.Sanjeev Mishra, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.N.P. Sahni, Advocate for the respondent. . +ITA No.786/2011 . . While carrying out the reassessment, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee had shown gifts received amounting to `15.00 lakhs form six persons. After making proper enquiries and eliciting information from the assessee, the Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the assessee could not show that these were genuine gifts received by him from those persons. Even the credit- worthiness of the donor was not established. In these circumstances, the Assessing Officer added `15.00 lakh to the income of the assessee under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Though CIT(A) deleted the addition, the ITAT set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the order of the Assessing Officer on the following facts: . ?5.5 We find that in this case specific information was received by D.I.T. was received for assessee receiving bogus gifts. Moreover, we find that these amounts have been received from persons who are totally unrelated with the assessee. Moreover, there is no occasion for the assessee for receiving the gifts from those unrelated persons. Moreover AO has given a finding that amount equivalent to the amount of gifts plus commission thereon have been first created in the bank account of the donees and then cheques issued by them was cleared. These circumstances clearly indicated that assessee has not been able to discharge its burden that the gifts received were not its undisclosed income.? . ITA No.786/2011 Page 1 of 2 These are pure findings of fact. No question of law arises. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal. . . A.K. SIKRI, J. . . . . MAY 25, 2011 M.L. MEHTA, J. Dev . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ITA No.786/2011 Page 2 of 2 . #36 and 37