INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“SMC” BENCH, DELHI
BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.2213/Del/2024
(Assessment Year 2012-13)
Krishna Nand Rai Vs. Income Tax Officer,
RZ/P-5/290, Gali No. 5C Ward 70(2)
Geetanjali Park, Civic Centre,
West Sagarpur, Minto Road,
Delhi- 110046 New Delhi – 110002
थायीले खासं ./जीआइआरसं ./PAN/GIR No: AIRPR6093F
Appellant .. Respondent
Appellant by : Sh. Ankush Jain, CA
Respondent by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing 24.10.2024
Date of Pronouncement 20.11.2024
ORDER
PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM:
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the
order dated 15.03.2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal
1
ITA No.2213/Del/2024
Krishna Nand Rai
Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The addition of Rs.10,80,000/- on account of
cash deposit made by the assessee is the subject matter before us.
2. The assessee was married in February, 2011 and he received
gift in cash from his father Shri Vinod Kumar Rai of Rs.5,00,000/-
and Rs.5,80,000/- from his father in law namely Shri Avadh Kumar
Rai. Affidavits affirmed by his father and his father in law have been
duly submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) a photocopy whereof have been
annexed to the records are placed before us by the assessee. The
Ld. CIT(A) disputed both the affidavits on technical ground. The
affidavit affirmed by Shri Vinod Kumar Rai dated 05.04.2019 and
the affidavit filed by the father in law Shri Avadh Kumar Rai dated
25.04.2011 was disputed by the CIT(A) in respect of date mentioned
therein. In both the affidavits the deponents clearly stated that the
amount of Rs.5,00,000/- Rs. 5,80,000/- was gifted to the assessee
before us and the source of such cash was from agricultural
income. Though the date of the stamp paper is being disputed both
are of April 2011. Moreso, marriage invitation card of the assessee
and the proof of agricultural land have also been annexed to the
paper book in support of such income earned by the donors along
with separate statements made by the two donors mentioned above.
Considering the evidences adduced by the assessee, the stand
taken by the assessee seems to be genuine and hence, the addition
made by the Ld. CIT(A) disputing the date of stamp paper is not
found to be sustainable in the eyes of law when the other
documents is found to be acceptable; veracity of the same
2
ITA No.2213/Del/2024
Krishna Nand Rai
particularly when neither objected by the authorities below. The
addition is, thus, deleted.
3. Appeal preferred by the assessee is, thus, allowed,
Order pronounced in the open court on 20.11.2024
Sd/-
(Madhumita Roy)
Judicial Member
Date 20.11.2024
Rohit: PS
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT NEW DELHI
3
ITA No.2213/Del/2024
Krishna Nand Rai