CIT v. Anil Kumar

Sh. Krishan Kumar, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

…mar, New Delhi. below to prove genuineness of the gift in the matter, therefore, it is clear that gift in the matter is not genuine gift and is arranged affair of the assessee and an afterthought. The Hon’ble Delhi High court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar 292 ITR 552 (Del.) held as under : “In the case of gifts mere identification of the donor and showing the movement of the gift amount through banking channels is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the gift. Since the claim of gift is made by the assessee, the onus lies on him not only to establish the identity of the person making the gift but also…

Rajiv Chandran, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-32(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Sainiassessment Year: 2010-11 Rajiv Chandran Vs Ito B-45, Gulmohar Park, Ward 32(5) New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Akdpc3523B Appellant Respondent

…nors and their source have been filed on record. Therefore, it appears that it was the unexplained amount of the assessee which assessee tried to explain through the alleged gifts. I rely upon decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar 292 ITR 552, decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P. Mohan Kala 291 ITR 278 and decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Yashpal Goel vs. CIT 6 AY 2010-11 Rajiv Chandran 310 ITR 75. Accordingly, no interference is called for in the matter. I, confirm the addition of Rs. 5 lakhs. 8. No other source of balance amount…

Shri Krishna Shriram, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

…mother will not absolve him from discharging the onus casted upon him U/s 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.1 place reliance on the decision of hon'ble ITA No. 866 , 1417/Del/2013 12 jurisdictional High Court pronounced in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar (2007) 292 ITR 552 which is on similar facts. In this case the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that in the case of gifts mere indication of the donor and showing the movement of the gift amount through banking channels is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the gift. Since the claim of gift is made by the assessee, the onus lies on him not only to establis…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Krishna Shriram, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are dismissed

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2006-07

…mother will not absolve him from discharging the onus casted upon him U/s 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.1 place reliance on the decision of hon'ble ITA No. 866 , 1417/Del/2013 12 jurisdictional High Court pronounced in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar (2007) 292 ITR 552 which is on similar facts. In this case the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that in the case of gifts mere indication of the donor and showing the movement of the gift amount through banking channels is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the gift. Since the claim of gift is made by the assessee, the onus lies on him not only to establis…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Gujarat Guardian Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue against the direction of the Ld

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle- New Friends Colony, 10(2), New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan: Aaacg1622K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle-10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Cr Building, Ip Estate, Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…rule 8D(1)(a) and record his satisfaction as required there under, question of applying rule 8D(2)(iii) did not arise. Further attention in this regard is invited to the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd. [2017] 392 ITR 552 (Delhi) wherein the court held that the assessing officer cannot re-compute disallowance under section Gujarat Guradian Limited V DCIT DCIT V Gujarat Guradian Limited A Y 2010-11 ITA No 1106 & 973/Del/2015 14A by invoking rule 8D without elucidating and explaining why assessee's voluntary disallowance is unreasonable and unsatisfactory. It would…

Achla Dhawan vs. Income Tax Officer

The appeal of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri S. K. Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishi

…ear a dry and unreal legalistic approach ” Further, there are various recent courts‟ decisions which all disaprovc such concocted gifts; the conclusion arising out of variety combination of factors. Some of these emulative decisions are :- CIT vs. Anil Kumar, 292 ITR 552 (Del.); “In the case of gifts mere idcntitication of the donor and showing the movement of the gift amount through banking channels is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the gift. Since the claim of gift is made by the asscsscc, the onus lies on him not only to establish the identity of the person making the gift but also his capacity to…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…satisfaction u/s 14A(2) of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules ‘1962 disallowance is untenable. Reliance was placed on the following judgments: - Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT 81 taxmann.com 111 (SC) - Pr. CIT v. U.K. Paints 392 ITR 552 (Del) 6840/Del./2014 4 - CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. 370 ITR 338 (Del) - Joint Investments (P) Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del) 4. On the other hand, ld. DR relied on the order of assessment 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance by holding as under: “6.5 I find tha…

Mr Vidit Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Sainiassessment Year : 2010-11

…s declaration no source of given gift to the assessee has been mentioned. Thus the comments of assessee to prove creditworthiness of the donors and genuineness of the transaction have not been proved. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anil Kumar 292 ITR 552 held "In the case of gifts mere identification of the donor and showing the movement of the gift amount through banking channels is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the gift. Since the claim of gift is made by the assessee, the onus lies on him not only to establish the identity of the person making the gift but also his capacity to…

Raj Bala, Delhi vs. ITO, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Smt. Raj Bala, Village Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Mandola Loni, H-5, West 2(2), Ghaziabad Jyoti Nagar, Loni Road, Delhi Gir/Pan :Aanpr2043K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. C.S. Anand, Adv. Respondent By Sh. V.P. Mishra, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 07.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 27.07.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 25/02/2013 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad, For Assessment Year 2006-07, Raising Following Grounds: I. That On The Facts Of The Case & Under The Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Rejecting The Assessee’S Claim That The Learned A.O. Had Wrongly/Illegally Assumed Jurisdiction To Issue Notice U/S 148. Ii. That On The Facts Of The Case & Under The Law, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs. 4,08,000/-, Made By The Learned A.O. U/S 69 In The Hands Of The Assessee For A.Y. 2006-07

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 Smt. Raj Bala, Village Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Mandola Loni, H-5, West 2(2), Ghaziabad Jyoti Nagar, Loni Road, Delhi GIR/PAN :AANPR2043K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. C.S. Anand, Adv. Respondent by Sh. V.P. Mishra, Sr.DR Date of hearing 07.06.2016 Date of pronouncement 27.07.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25/02/2013 of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Gha…

Sarita Aggarwal

Bench: The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Who By Order Dated 27Th February, 1998, Deleted The Addition After Taking On Record Additional Evidence. Revenue On Appeal, Has Succeeded Before 2015:Dhc:1152-Db

…1152-DB ITA 133/2003 Page 12 of 14 16. The judgment in the case of Mayawati (supra), also refers to decisions of Division Bench of this Court in CIT versus Anil Kumar [2007] 292 ITR 552 (Del). This decision in favour of the Revenue observes that when there was nothing on record to show financial capacity of the donor, their creditworthiness and what kind of relationship the donors had with the assessee, addition would be justified. In Rajeev Tandon versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2007] 294 ITR 488 (Del), the…