Shri. Kushal Virendra Tandon, Mumbai vs Acit 16 (2) (2), Mumbai on 8 July, 2021
22. In the case before us, the assessee‟s father i.e Shri Virendra Tandon
had gifted the amount in question to his son i.e the assessee by way of
financial assistance at a time when the assessee is stated to be struggling for
his survival in the industry. In our considered view, utilisation of accumulated
savings by a father for the purpose of financially assisting his son is not
something unheard of in our society. We may herein reiterate that Shri.
Virendra Tandon (supra) had categorically admitted of having gifted the
amount in question to his son i.e the assessee and the authenticity of the said
claim had not been disproved or dislodged by the department by placing on
record any material proving to the contrary. In our considered view, in case
the A.O would had fairly considered the documentary evidence that was filed
by the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings to support the
genuineness of the gift transaction a/w the source thereof, then, no adverse
inferences qua the gift transaction in question would have surfaced.