L. SYED IBRAHIM BAHADUSHA,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

ITA 406/BANG/2014Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 August 2015AY 2004-054 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, agreeing that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of the gift. The lack of a clear relationship, proper documentation, and a plausible occasion for the gift were key factors.

What were the facts?

The assessee received a sum of Rs. 7 lakhs as a gift. The Assessing Officer treated this as an unexplained cash credit as the assessee failed to provide a confirmation letter, gift deed, or details of the transaction's origin.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee discharged the onus to prove the genuineness of a cash credit treated as a gift, by establishing the identity, capacity, and genuineness of the transaction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SINGLE MEMBER BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI D.MANMOHAN, VICE-Shri L.Syed Ibrahim Bahadusha,

For Respondent: Shri P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT(DR)
Hearing: 24/08/2015Pronounced: 24/08/2015

Per D.MANMOHAH, VP:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-I, Bangalore, and it pertains to assessment year 2004-05. 2. A sum of Rs.7 lakhs, shown to have been received as gift from Shri Jamaluddin Sheik Fareed, was treated as unexplained cash credit in the hands of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not furnished confirmation letter from the party. In fact, no gift deed copy was produced and details of mode of Shri L.Syed Ibrahim Bahadusha payment, origination bank and other bank account details were not furnished before the AO.

3.

Aggrieved by the addition made by the AO, u/s 68 of the IT Act, assessee contended before the CIT(A) that the impugned sum was received as gift out of natural love and affection since he is the s

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →