DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. MIRA BIBI, MURSHIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 727/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 January 2026AY 2017-188 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the order of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of ₹1,21,00,000 was to be upheld. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s reasoning. The CIT(A) had noted that the assessee had provided confirmations from the donors, their financial statements, ITRs, and balance sheets, which showed that the donors had sufficient resources and explained sources for the gifts. The CIT(A) also observed that the donors were regular income tax assessees with substantial incomes. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s finding that the assessee had discharged the onus of proving the three limbs of Section 68 (identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the donors). Furthermore, the Tribunal concurred with the CIT(A)'s observation that gifts received from relatives, as defined under Section 56(2)(vii) of the Act, are not taxable in the hands of the assessee under that section. Consequently, the addition made by the AO was deleted, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue (DCIT, CC-4(4), Kolkata) appealed the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (CIT(A)) dated 27.12.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18. The appeal challenged the deletion of an addition of ₹1,21,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had treated cash gifts received by the assessee, Mira Bibi, from her brothers-in-law, Mojibur Rahaman Biswas (₹75,00,000) and Latifuddin (₹46,00,000), as unexplained cash credit. The case was reopened under Section 148 due to unreflected cash deposits and withdrawals. The assessee provided confirmations, financial statements, ITRs, and balance sheets of the donors, who were regular income tax assessees with substantial income. The AO's addition was based on the absence of gift deeds, despite the documentary evidence provided by the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal had to decide if the addition of ₹1,21,00,000 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, made by the AO, was justified, considering the assessee provided confirmations, financial statements, ITRs, and balance sheets of the donors (brothers-in-law) who were regular taxpayers with sufficient means. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the gifts were from relatives (brothers-in-law), and all necessary documents like confirmations, financial statements, and ITRs of the donors were provided, establishing the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the donors. The assessee relied on judicial pronouncements including CIT Vs. Sanjeev Jain, Sharon Agarwal Vs. ITO, and Sheela Yogi Vs. ITO. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the AO rightly made the addition under Section 68 as the assessee failed to furnish gift deeds, treating the cash gifts as unexplained cash credit. The Revenue challenged the deletion of the addition by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 139(1),Section 56(2)(vii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra &, Ms. Anupam Kumar Dey, AR
For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Hearing: 21.11.2025Pronounced: 20.01.2026

This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 27.12.2024 for the AY 2017-18.

2.

The only issue raised by the Revenue is against the order of ld. CIT (A) deleting the addition of ₹1,21,00,000/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act in respect of cash gifts received from donors by treating the same as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act.

5.2.1. I have gone through the assessment order as well as the submission of the assessee. On examining the same, it is noticed that during the year under consideration, the assessee had received two cash gifts from two persons namely Mr. Mojibur Rahaman Biswas & Mr. Latifuddin of Rs.75,00,000/- and Rs.46,00,000/-, totaling to Rs.1,21,00,000/-, who are own brothers-in-law of the assessee. During the asst. proceedings, the AO had asked the assessee to prove the genuineness and source of such cash gift. It is noticed that the assessee had furnished all the relevant details and documents in respect of such cash gift during the asst. proceedings viz. confirmations from the doners, their financial statements, copy of ITRs of these persons, PANs, Registered addresses, balance sheets reflecting such gifts to the assessee etc. However, it is also observed that the assessee had not provided gift deed to the AO. On the basis of the same, the AO is found to be opined that the cash gift of Rs.1,21,00,000/- as bogus and the assessee’s own money. Hence, the said amount was added back to the total income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act. 5.2.2. In the Income Tax Act, 1961, the section deals with taxability of gifts is section 56(2). More specifically, if the gift was given in the period 01.10.2009 to 31.03.2017, the striking section is 56(2)(vii). Hence, there is a need to mention the relevant portion of the said section: “(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-section (1), the following incomes, shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head Income from other sources", namely :— ……….. (vii) where an individual or a Hindu undivided family receives, in any previous year, from any person or persons on or after the 1st day of October, 2009 but before the 1st day of April, 2017,— (a) any sum of money, without consideration, the aggregate value of which exceeds fifty thousand rupees, the whole of the aggregate value of such sum; ………….. Provided further that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received— (a)from any relative; or (b)on the occasion of the marriage of the individual; or (c)under a will or by way of inheritance; or …………..

6.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.01.2026.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →