IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 GTA.No. 12 of 2008() -------------------- GTA.9/COCH/2003 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT ----------------------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- M. PEERMOOHAMMED, T.C.27/478-1, GAS HOUSE LANE, R.C.JUNCTION, KUNNUKUZHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS GIFT TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. .................................................................... G.T. Appeal No.12 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The Gift Tax Appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal confirming first appellate authority's order cancelling gift tax assessment made under Section 4(1)(c) of the Gift Tax Act. We have heard Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant and have gone through the impugned orders. 2. The gift involved in this case is value of half share of property purchased in the joint names of the respondent and his wife. The Assessing Officer noticed that respondent's wife did not make any payment for the half share of property acquired and since the consideration was fully paid by respondent, it is a deemed gift under Section 4(1)(c) of the Gift Tax Act. Even though in principle we agree with the Standing Counsel that Section 4(1)(c) is attracted, it is seen that on facts, respondent proved before the appellate authorities that the respondent's source of fund was through borrowals and two years after 2 the assessment Rs.5 lakhs was repaid by his wife through Account Payee Cheque. No investigation is seen made about the source of fund of respondent's wife to repay the loan. In view of the finding on facts by the first appellate authority and the Tribunal that the source of fund for acquisition was borrowal and respondent's wife repaid the loan to him, it was a case of proved loan arrangement between respondent and his wife. We do not find any substantial question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal and consequently we dismiss the appeal. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge C.K.ABDUL REHIM Judge pms