Shagun money received on occasion of marriage not taxable income – ITAT

Shagun money received on marriage of individual cannot be considered as income in the year of its receipt – ITAT

In a recent judgment, ITAT has held that receipt of shagun money without consideration on the occasion of the marriage of the individual cannot be considered as the income of the individual on the year of its receipt.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
5143 (2026) (05) abacus.in ITAT

Important Case Laws relied upon by Parties:
A2Z Infraservices vs Quippo Infrastructure Ltd

In the instant case, the appellant assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in confirming addition on account of alleged cash payment to event management company on the occassion of marriage of niece.

A search was conducted u/s 132 in case of the assessee. In response to the notice u/s 153A, the assessee filed return of income showing income from salary, income from capital gains and income from other sources.

During the course of search at the residence, phone of the assessee, was seized and on analysis of the same, it was seen that the assessee had received a message related to wedding expenses of his brother’s daughter from an employee of an event management company showing that assessee had payment to the said company partly in cheque and 2/3^rd part in cash.

In response to the show cause notice, the assessee stated that he did not have any dependent whose marriage was performed by him and the payments in cash was made out of the Shagun money received by the daughter only on the occasion of her marriage from relative and the assessee.

The AO disbelieved the assesee and in absence of any plausible explanation along with documentary evidences, the amount of alleged cash expenditure was treated as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and added to the income of assessee.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee challenged the order of the CIT(A) and inter alia submitted that as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court a WhatsApp chat message cannot be used as evidence in any proceedings. Thus, any reference to and reliance on any WhatsApp chat messages by the revenue cannot incriminate the assessee at all.

The Tribunal observed that no doubt, the assessee had made the payment of cheque payments and the other part payment made in cash, it was presumed by the AO that the cash payments must have been made by the assessee over looking the fact that it was marriage of an adult and also the elder brother was also involved in the marriage, therefore it was difficult to understand, why the payments made in cash was presumed only against the assessee.

The Tribunal further noted that there is no document to show that the AO had made any investigation with the receiver, whether the payments were made by the assessee or any other family member. Just because substantial portion of the marriage expense was made by the assessee by cheque, it was presumed that the balance cash payments must also been made by the assessee. The AO had also not quantified the collection of Shagun money during the marriage. Since there was exception in the section 56(2)(v) of the Act, receipt of money without consideration on the occasion of the marriage of the individual, the same cannot be considered as the income of the individual on the year of receipt.

The Tribunal opined that the marriage was of the niece of the assessee, who happened to be the adult, there was possibility of receipt of Shagun in the marriage, the same belonged to the bride groom. In case the presumption was that the payment was made but the source was not identified by the AO with the improper enquiry, the easiest possible way to presume that it must have been made by the assessee since the part payment was made by cheque payment by the assessee.

Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the grounds raised by the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• CBDT extends due date of tax audit for FY 2025-26 to 21st October 2026
• Denying accumulation of u/s 11(2) merely on grounds of delay in filing Form No. 10 is unsustainable
• Engagement of 05 Young Professionals CAs at Central Registrar of Cooperative Society
• AO can’t take two different stands on immunity u/s 270AA(2) for a same transaction
• ITAT held 2000 gram jewellery reasonable in view of customary practices & CBDT Instruction