K.L. Aggarwal vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax
1990 Latest Caselaw 398 Del

JUDGMENT

B.N. Kirpal, J.

1. The Petitioner seeks reference of the following questions of this court :

"1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law and on facts in upholding the addition of Rs. 50,000, being the amount of gift made to the assessed by Smt. Shriomani Devi, in complete disregard of the fact that in the assessment year 1973-74 too, a similar gift was received by the assessed from the husband of the said donor, which had been accepted as genuine by the Revenue ?

2. Whether the adverse findings recorded in the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are sustainable in law, as the same are vitiated on account of non-consideration of relevant material and evidence on record and consideration of inadmissible evidence and extraneous material/ grounds ?

3. Whether there was any material with the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to disbelieve the source of the aforesaid receipt and to uphold the aforesaid addition, by recording a finding the capacity of the donor to make the gift had not been established ?

4. In view of the above and even otherwise, whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the aforesaid addition of Rs. 50,000 ?"

2. The questions pertain to the additions made because the Department had disbelieved the contention of the assessed that there had been a valid gift made to the assessed. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the donor was not examined. We find that the onus of proving the validity of the gift was on the assessed. It was for the assessed to produce the donor for being examined. There is no grievance made by the assessed that such an opportunity was not granted. The question of summoning the donor could have arisen only if the assessed had informed the assessing authority that the assessed was not in a position to obtain the presence of the donor and that summons should be issued. No such request was made to the Income-tax Officer. We are unable to agree with the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that any cogent material has been disregarded. The finding of the Tribunal treating the amounts in question as the income of the petitioner by not accepting the story of gift is a decision on a question of fact. Any conclusion arrived at by appreciation of evidence on record is a question of fact and no question of law arises.

3. Dismissed.