ANIL KUMAR S. GATHANI & ORS(HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-37(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XXIV, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 674/CIT(A)-XXIV/37(3)/09-10 dated 30.04.2012. Assessment was framed by ITO, Wd-37(3), Kolkata u/s. 143(3)(ii)/254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for Assessment Year 2002-03 vide his order dated 29.12.2009.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the addition of unexplained gift amounting to Rs. 9 lacs received from nine donors i.e. Rs. 1 lac each added by AO u/s. 68 of the Act. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the addition was made and confirmed by CIT(A) only on the premise that the assessee failed to produce original gift deeds and original papers relating to gifts i.e. names, address and any other information. According to ld. Counsel, now he has every document with him to prove the identity of the donor, capacity to make the gift and relationship. We find from the assessment order and the order of CIT(A) that in the absence of these documents, the addition was made and confirmed by first appellate authority. The relevant finding of CIT(A) in para 2.3.3 reads as under: “2.3.3. The same principle is also applicable in this case. The surrounding circumstances and the human probabilities do not support the case of the appellant. In the circumstances of the case, the gifts are quite unusual and unnatural. Considering the fact of the case, I am of the opinion that the appellant has failed to prove the identity of the donors, the financial capacity to make the gift, human probabilities, the relationship between the donor and the done, the occasion for making gift and the existence of reciprocity. In view of the above discussion, the addition of Rs.9,00,000/- made by the AO is confirmed. These grounds of appeal are dismissed.”

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.