ANUBHAV AGGARWAL,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-1, LUDHIANA

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in making incorrect addition of Rs. 6,36,11,825/- being gifts received from Brother-in-Law residing out of India being received through proper banking channel. 2. Non-applicability of Section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961 as assessee has provided Bank Statements and Foreign Inward Remittance Certificates for all the gifts received. 3. The contention of Ld. AO and Ld. CIT (Appeals) is wrong that the assessee has routed unaccounted funds generated by the flagship company M/s ARK Imports Private Limited and routed these funds from different bank accounts in the name of Anubhav Aggarwal and other group companies i.e. M/s Genex Polyfab Limited, M/s Genex Fincap Private Limited.

It emerges out from the record that ITA No. 1283/Chd/2017 and other cases of this group are on Board since 29th March 2017. From the Note Sheet entry, it is seen that Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Shri Jasleen Khera and others have appeared from time to time and thereafter all the Counsels have withdrawn their power of attorney and pleaded no instructions. On 26.9.2024, Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate and Shri Sanjay Sood, CA also withdrew their power of attorney. It is pertinent to note that as and when a counsel withdrew his power of attorney, it is a duty cast upon him to serve a notice through registered post upon the Assessee

4 Since the amount received as gifts during the different periods was substantial say more than 122 Crores and are being received continuously on different dates nearly throughout the year(s) and that to without any occasion, the genuineness of receipt of such gifts was required to be examined. Therefore, in order to verify the genuineness of the receipt of gifts as claimed, the assessee was asked to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions justifying the receipt of above amounts as gifts as claimed. He was also specifically asked to establish the relationship with the donee supported with documentary evidence. However, the assessee instead of establishing the genuineness of the receipt of above amounts as a gift and the relationship with the donee, filed his objections as per his letter dated 01.03.2016. 2.5 The explanation of the assessee has been considered and found no merit in it. It is a settled law that no person can make a gift even to his near relative without any reason / occasion / consideration. It is 1283 -Chd-2019 Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana a matter of record that the above gifts have been received not on a particular occasion but in a continuous process. Moreover, it is not evident as to whether the gifts as claimed was ever made and the doner had the resources to make such gifts of a substantial amount. Since the assessee has failed to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the gifts claimed to have been received from his brother-in-law during the year under consideration and as such it is held that the amount of deposits introduced by the assessee in his bank account in the guise of receipt of gifts represents his undisclosed income earned from undisclosed sources which is liable for taxation. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 6,36,11,825/-received in the guise of gifts is held to be assessee's own income earned from undisclosed sources and is therefore added to the income returned. Accordingly, an addition of Rs. 6,36,11,825/- is made to the income returned. 6. We have gone through the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A). We find that the Assessing Officer has passed a speaking order based on various incriminating documents found and seized from various business and residential premise of the group. Against the order of the Assessing Officer, the Assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 1283 -Chd-2019 Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana different grounds. The ld. CIT(A), in our view, has passed a speaking order on merit on each and every issue / ground raised by the Assessee in the appeal. The Assessee dissatisfied with the order of the ld. CIT(A) has filed this appeal before the Tribunal but despite giving fifty opportunities to the Assessee, the Assessee has not complied with and further that all the Counsels and C.A. who had filed their Power of Attorney have also withdrawn in the absence of any instruction from the Assessee. 7. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A) and prayed that the appeal of the Assessee deserves to be dismissed. 8. In our view, both the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) have passed the assessment order and the appellate order keeping in view the aspect of natural justice. They have considered all the necessary documents, statements and submissions filed by the Assessee. The relevant part of the finding of the ld. CIT(A) passed vide common order for AYs 2009-10 to 2013-14 in the case of Assessee in question, is reproduced as under:- 4.11 Having considered the material available on record, I find that it is not disputed that funds in the form of gifts have been received by the 1283 -Chd-2019 Anubhav Aggarwal, Ludhiana appellant amounting in all to Rs. 1,22,22,39,722 in seven assessment years from A.Y 2008-09 to 2014-15. As regards, supporting evidence is concerned the appellant has submitted that these funds have been received from his wife Ms Svetlana Umarov and from brother in law Sh. Roman Umarov. As regards, sources of these funds is concerned it is stated by the appellant that these funds were received by Sh. Roman Umarov and his wife under the will of their father Sh. Alexander Umarov which is dated 06.01.2008. 4.12 The appellant has however failed to furnish the reasons for having received these gifts over a number of years and also could not furnish a copy of the bank account of Sh. Alexander Umarov whose estate is stated to have been distributed amongst his kin. The appellant also could not furnish a copy of the financial statements of the concern (belonging to Sh. Alexander Umarov) whose funds are being received by the appellant. The financial worth and financial capacity of the donor also could not be established with evidence in the form of financial statements, a copy of the ITRs, a copy of Bank statements etc. The appellant has alsofailed to state the reasons for having received these gifts and also the occasion on 'which these gifts were received. 4.13 I find that appellant has failed to furnish this evidence both at the stage of assessment as well as in the course of remand proceedings. The onus clearly lies upon appellant under the provisions of section 68 of the IT Act to establish the sources of credits in the bank account. The appellant has clearly failed to furnish the same to the satisfaction of the AO. The judicial decisions cited by the appellant are found

Since the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is a speaking order on each issue, therefore, in our considered opinion, there is no need to interfere in the findings given by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, findings given by the ld. CIT(A) on different issues in his Appeal Order are hereby sustained. Accordingly,