Cash claimed to have been received as gift if the recipient fails to explain the reason behind piece-meal deposit of an amount purportedly received in lump-sum

 

Whether cash claimed to have been received as gift is treatable as such, if the recipient fails to explain the reason behind piece-meal deposit of an amount purportedly received in lump-sum & if there is also a failure to explain the source of such deposits – NO: ITAT

 

– Assessee’s appeal dismissed: PUNE ITAT

 

Nishigandha Vishwas Kulkarni Vs ITO

 

 

 the source of the cash deposit has been explained by the assessee as gift received from her father-in-law Mr Vishwas Vasant Kulkarni of Rs 6,20,000/- and also gift received from her mother-in-law of Rs 9,65,000/-. Against the cash deposit of Rs 12,98,500/-, the assessee points out that she has available cash of Rs 15,85,000/-, they are vis-à-vis gift received from father-in-law and mother-in-law. The assessee was unable to explain as to why the sale proceeds received on 05.04.2006 were deposited in the bank account of assessee between the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008. Similar was the position with regard to gift received from mother-in-law. 

 

Before the CIT(A), the assessee pointed out that father-in-law had advanced cash to various persons and when they returned the same after his demise, the amount was handed over to the assessee and was deposited. 

 

The perusal of deposits made by the assessee shows that the amounts were deposited in bits and pieces totaling Rs 13,88,500/-. 

 

In case the amount was available with the assessee on the sale of properties by her in-laws, then where was the need to deposit the amount in bits and pieces during the month of December, 2007 and thereafter, in March, 2008.

 

 

 Further, the assessee has failed to link the sale proceeds of agricultural land received by her father-in-law with the amounts given as hand loans to various persons. 

 

The whole exercise is an afterthought by the assessee and the amount if received after the death of father-in-law should be available with the assessee in lump sum and there was no requirement to deposit the amount in bank in bits and pieces on different dates. 

 

There is no merit in the stand of assessee in this regard.

 

 Hence, the assessee has failed to explain the source of deposits and in the absence of any evidence linking its claim to the evidences available, the addition made by authorities is upheld in the hands of assessee.