Feature Post

Gift received by an individual from Hindu undivided family (HUF) isn’t exempt: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal || Gyanchand M. Bardia v. The Income Tax Officer

Gift received by an individual from Hindu undivided family (HUF) isn’t exempt

Gyanchand M. Bardia v. The Income Tax Officer  (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal )– Ahmedabad 21 February, 2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH AHMEDABAD
BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 1072/Ahd/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

Income From Other Sources :- The assessee claimed that gift of question amount received from his HUF was exempt from tax under section 56(2)(vii) of Income Tax Act. However, the Assessing Officer held that the term ‘relative’ in Explanation (e) to Section 56(2)(vii) does not include Hindu undivided family (HUF) as donor and, therefore, added the impugned amount to assessee’s income under Section 68 of this act.

On further appeal, the Income Tax Tribunal held in favour of revenue that as per Explanation to Section 56(2)(vii) members of an Hindu undivided family HUF are its relatives. Therefore, if Hindu undivided family (HUF) receives any sum from any of its member, such sum shall not be chargeable to tax. However, in vice-versa cases when member receives any sum from the HUF, same would be chargeable to tax as the term ‘relatives’ defined under said Explanation does not include HUF as a relative of such individual. The legislative intent is very clear that an Hindu undivided family is not to be taken as a donor in case of an individual recipient. Thus, the assessee’s plea of having received a valid gift from his HUF was rightly declined and impugned addition was to be upheld.

The amount in question is exempt u/s.10(2) of Income tax Act. We find no merit in the instant alternative plea as well since a gift sum which is not allowable under the relevant specific clause cannot be ITA No. 1072/Ahd/16  And This assessee’s ITAI appeal is dismissed

 

(If you liked the Article, please follow )

Twitter

Facebook

(Team) LTG Publication Private Limited

Share
Published by
(Team) LTG Publication Private Limited

Recent Posts

RAJASTHAN AAR CLARIFIES 18% GST ON MINING ROYALTY PAID TO STATE GOVERNMENT

RAJASTHAN AAR CLARIFIES 18% GST ON MINING ROYALTY PAID TO STATE GOVERNMENT RAJASTHAN AUTHORITY FOR…

1 month ago

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS VALIDITY OF LEVY GST ON LOTTERIES: SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS PVT LTD v. UNION OF INDIA

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS VALIDITY OF LEVY GST ON LOTTERIES: SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs…

1 month ago

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS THE VALIDITY OF ARREST PROVISIONS UNDER CUSTOM AND GST ACT: RADHIKA AGARWAL V. UNION OF INDIA

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS THE VALIDITY OF ARREST PROVISIONS UNDER CUSTOM AND GST ACT: RADHIKA AGARWAL…

1 month ago

SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES DEPRECIATION ON NON-COMPETE FEE U/S 32(1)(ii) OF INCOME TAX ACT

SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES DEPRECIATION ON NON-COMPETE FEE U/S 32(1)(ii) OF INCOME TAX ACT REPORTBALE SUPREME…

2 months ago

Supreme Court Issues Directions for Cataloguing Witnesses and Documentary Evidences in Criminal Trial: Manojbhai Jethabhai Parmar Case

Supreme Court issues directions for Cataloguing witnesses and documentary evidences in Criminal Trial: Manojbhai Jethabhai…

3 months ago

Head Office Expenditure of Non-Resident Companies in Relation to Indian Business Subject to the Deduction Cap Prescribed u/s 44C: Supreme Court

Head Office Expenditure of Non-Resident Companies in Relation to Indian Business Subject to the Deduction…

3 months ago