Loading judgment…
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.
Held
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.
Key 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.
Sections Cited
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.