Ita/790/2011 Of Vikal Aggarwal v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

fr % 3r.os.201r. Present: Mr. Harish Malhotra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. R.K. Modi, Advocatefor the appellant.Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondent. + ITA No. 79OI2OLI* *1. In the return filed by the appellant/assessee for the assessment year20OI-02 the assessee had shown that it had received gifts from fourpersons for a total sum of Rs.5,24,000/-. The particulars thereof are as under:- All these gifts were received on the same date i.e., 23'd March, 2001.ln order to adjudge the veracity of gifts and also the credit worthinessof the persons, who had given the aforesaid purported gifts to theappellant, Assessing Officer, directed the assessee to produce downersalong with their bank pass books. However, the assessee showed hisinability to produce these donars. In the first instant, the AssessingOfficer had recorded the statement of appellant as well as Shri AnilKumar Aggarwal. In his statement the appellant stated these downerswere resident of Kolkata. He was not able to give their addresses. Healso did not know the relationship of those persons. He however,stated that they may be distant relatives or family friends of hisgrandfather. He further said that the donees had come to Delhi on thedeath anniversary of his grandfather which falls on 25th [january ]and 2. f''.4 5. 6. gave him the gifts. The assessee could not explain the favour done byhim in lieu of the gifts received by the downers. In the statement of Shri Anil Kumar Aggarwal, father of the assessee,he stated that his wife and children had never made any gifts toanyone in their life. As far as the aforesaid four persons areconcerned, though he confirmed that his son had received gifts fromthem, but he could not give their residential address. In order to clarify the credit worthiness and genuineness of these gifts,the Assessing Officer issued commission under section 131(1Xd) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 was issue to lTO, Ward 11(2), Kolkata. The ITOof Kolkata recorded the statements of the said four persons. As pertheir statement it was revealed that they were persons of low means.They had never come to Delhi at any time. They were not able todisclose the source from which they could give such huge amount.Some of them even stated that they do not know the assessee and hadno relation with him. All these statements are analysed and discussedin detail by the Assessing Ofticer and ITAT in para 4 of the impugnedorder as well. On the basis of material on record the Assessing Officer confirmed thatthe credit worthiness and genuineness was not established by theassessee. The assessee could not produce any material on record asto why these persons, who were not related to the assessee would,have given-gifts of this amount to the assessee. He thus came to the conclusion that it was a colourable transactionshown by the assessee without iny credence. On this basis, addition 7. of Rs.5,24,000/- was made by the Assessing Officer in the Income ofthe assessee invoking the provisions of Section 68 of he Income TaxAct.the assessee invoking the provisions of Section 68 of he Income TaxAct. The CIT(A) as well as ITAT have confirmed the aforesaid findings of theAssessing Officer. These are pure findings of facts which are based onthe evidence/material on record. We do not find any perversitytherein. No question of law, much less substantial question of lawarises for consideration. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. WA.K. StKRl, J.StKRl, J.J. A.K. StKRl, J.StKRl, J.J. MAY 31, 2Ot1flIC M.L. MEHTA, J.