Case Law Details
Sanjeev Gajendra Pancholi Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Perusal of the above gift deed shows that the donor viz. Shri Narendra Maganbhai Pancholi has sold piece of agriculture land from 28.3.2008 to 30.3.2008 and one agriculture land on 26.7.1999 aggregating to Rs.11,64,698/-. The donor claimed that this amount has been invested in private bank, shroff and money lenders etc. and this amount till August 2011 accumulated around Rs.18.00 lakhs; out of this Rs.18.00 lakhs, the donor gifted to the assessee during August, 2011 to March 2012 a sum of Rs.17,27,000/-. The assessee has not proved or explained before the lower authorities the instalments of amount of gift given by the donor and mode of payment. When the AO has requested to produce the donor as well as witnesses, the assessee failed to do so. However, it is noticed that the gift deed executed in the non-judicial stamp paper is dated as 17.11.2011, however, the same was executed on 31.3.2012, i.e. almost after 100 days. Similarly, the ld.CIT(A) has held that sale of agriculture land by the donor pertained to the financial year 19992000 and 2008-09, but the assessee claimed that the copies were given during the financial year 2011-12, and there is a clear cut time gap of more than thousand days from the date of sale and the date of alleged donation made to the assessee. The same has not been explained by the assessee before the lower authorities. Further, it is seen from the gift deed that the donor stated to have deposited the sale proceeds in private banks, but no bank passbook or income from agriculture activity has been produced before the lower authorities. The assessee has also failed to produce the donor or the witnesses before the authorities. Even before us, except gift deed, the other three documents viz. 7/12 extracts, registered sale deed and latest 7/12 of the land record, which are in Gujarat language are only produced and English translation was not furnished. Hence, based on these unexplained documents from pages no.13 to 19 we are not in a position to adjudicate the issue on hand. The ld.DR also repeated the same arguments as were made before the lower authorities, and no new documents could be furnished to establish genuineness of the gift received from Shri Narendra Maganbhai Pancholi. In the absence of the same, ground raised by the assessee for deletion of impugned addition of Rs.17,27,000/- is hereby rejected.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This appeal is filed by the assessee against order dated 25.2.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Vadodara relating to the Asst.Year 2012-13.
2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual and an architect by profession and also partner in the partnership firm viz. M/s.Royal Enterprise, Baroda. For the Asst.Year 2012-13, the assessee filed its return of income on 30.9.2012 declaring total income of Rs.2,20,390/- along with agriculture income of Rs.35,690/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny assessment and notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) was served upon the assessee and assessment was completed on 30.3.2015 assessing total income at Rs.19,59,220/- by making an addition of Rs.17,27,000/- under section 68 of the Act. The ld.AO has also made another addition of Rs.11,830/- on account of excess rent received by the assessee. As far as addition of Rs.17,27,000/- is concerned, the assessee claimed that this was a gift received from his uncle, Shri Narendra Maganbhai Pancholi by way of selling agriculture land situated at village Bharan. The assessee has produced copy of unregistered gift deed dated 31.3.2012 wherein Shri Narendra Maganbhai Pancholi stated that he has gifted Rs.17,27,000/- in instalments during August 1999 to March, 2012 out of sale proceeds received from the sale of agriculture land. The ld.AO has observed that the gift-deed was executed on a stamp-paper which was produced by the assessee, and the assessee could not able to produce neither the donor viz. Shri Narendra Maganbhai Pancholi or the witnesses as stated in the gift deed. Further, the gift deed is not a registered deed, and not even notarized by Notary Public. The assessee was requested to produce break-up of details of gift received in instalments from August, 2011 till March, 2012. The same was also not produced before the AO. Therefore, the AO treated this receipt as unexplained cash credit, an added to the total come of the assessee. Further, the assessee has also received total rent of Rs.1,56,000/- from M/s.Swadhar Finser P.Ltd. during the financial year 2011-012. However, the assessee has shown rent of Rs.1,39,100/- only in the computation of income. Therefore, the balance rent amount of Rs.16,900/- after making stand deduction of Rs.5,070/- remaining amount of Rs.11,830/- was added to the income of the assessee. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the above disallowance.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
