1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 33 of 2004 C I T JODHPUR V/S PADAM SINGH CHOUHAN Mr. K.K. Bissa, for the appellant. None present for the respondent. Date of Order : 6.2.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI DEO NARAYAN THANVI,J. ORDER ----- This appeal has been filed by the Revenue, against the judgment of learned Tribunal, confirming the deletion of addition of Rs.4,50,000/-. The appeal was admitted on 16.7.2004, by framing following substantial question of law:- “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.4,50,000/-, Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/-, which have been received on account of gift when no relation has been established from whom gifts have been received, whether the finding of the learned Tribunal is perverse?” We have gone through the orders of the Assessing 2. Officer, the learned Commissioner, and the learned Tribunal. What we find is, that the Assessing Officer has assumed doubts against the donor, merely on the basis of his having deposited certain amounts in his accounts, soon before making of the gifts, and that the assessee had withdrawn the amounts deposited by him, including the amount of the said gifts, in short span of time. With this, the learned Assessing Officer has found, that the facts created doubt, that how the assessee as well as his family members are receiving such huge gifts from a person residing abroad, and concluded, that it appears, that the gifts are not genuine, and are only a managed affairs of the assessee. The learned Commissioner has reversed this finding by holding, that the assessee had clearly shown from the assessment proceedings, that the gifts were made out of love and affection towards the assessee, and it is a matter of God’s grace to make love and affection between Donors and Donee, and that to have love and affection between two persons, blood relation is not required, and looking to the status of the donors, the amount gifted was very meager. Then, it was found by the learned Commissioner, that the assessee has also furnished the copies of the gift deeds, and affidavits of the donors. In the opinion of the learned Commissioner, it is not a case, where the assessee had first given such amounts to the donors, and the donor returned back to the assessee by way of gift. The Commissioner had gone through the bank 3. accounts of the donors, copies thereof are on record, and found, that there was sufficient cash balance on the date of gift to the appellant, in respect of both the donors, and thus, the addition was deleted, and the learned Tribunal has affirmed this finding, by relying upon certain judgments. In our view, there is no legal basis to assume, that to recognize the gift to be genuine, there should be any blood relationship, or any close relationship, between the donor and the donee. Instances are not rare, when even strangers make gifts, out of very many considerations, including arising out of love, affection and sentiments. In our view, when the assessee has produced the copies of the gift deeds and the affidavits of the donors, in the absence of anything to show, that the act of the assessee in claiming gift, was an act by way of money laundering, simply because he happens to receive gifts, it cannot be said that, that is required to be added in his income. Accordingly, the question as framed is answered against the Revenue, and in favour of the assessee. The Appeal thus has no force and is hereby dismissed. ( DEO NARAYAN THANVI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. ms rathore