DINESH PRASHAD DANGWAL,DEHRADUN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , DEHRADUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 75/DDN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 January 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument, noting that the gifts were duly claimed and supported by confirmations and donor details. Consequently, the tribunal ordered the deletion of the Rs. 16 lakhs addition.

What were the facts?

The assessee received gifts totaling Rs. 16 lakhs from his father, brother, and son, claiming Rs. 5 lakhs, Rs. 5 lakhs, and Rs. 6 lakhs respectively. The Assessing Officer treated this amount as unexplained, and the CIT(A) upheld the addition. The assessee provided confirmations, income tax returns, and PANs of the donors.

What were the issues?

Whether the gifts received by the assessee from his father, brother, and son, totaling Rs. 16 lakhs, could be treated as unexplained income despite providing donor confirmations and details.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB”, DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 13.01.2026Pronounced: 13.01.2026
1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055313043(1), dated 22.08.2023 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Learned counsel submits at the outset that the assessee wishes to press for his solitary substantive issue directed against both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate findings treating an amount of Rs.16 lakhs as unexplained in his hands in assessment order dated 20.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that the impugned sum of Rs.16 lakhs has been duly claimed as representing the assessee’s gift(s) received from his father (Sh. Inder Dev Dangwal), brother (Sh. Ramesh Prasad) and son (Sh. Nitesh Prasad) amounting to Rs.5 lakhs each and Rs.6 lakhs; respectively. The assessee further appears to have filed their respective confirmations along with the corresponding income tax returns, PAN etc., who are stated to be assessed in the same jurisdiction.

4.

Faced with this situation, we find merit in the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance to delete the impugned addition of Rs.16 lakhs made in his hands in very terms.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →