S.S. MEHRA, J.M. Assessee by his present appeal challenges order dt. 18th Dec., 1985 of ld. AAC of IT, New Delhi, for asst. yr. 1976-77, inter alia, on following ground: "That ld. ITO has been wrong and unjustified in adding sum of Rs. 10,000 to income of petitioner on account of expenses incurred for purchase of return ticket from Delhi, Hongkont and Tokyo." By status assessee in individual and his accounting period was year ending 31st March, 1976. It was noted by ld. ITO that assessee proceeded on foreign tour on 10th March, 1976 to visit Hongkong, Manila,Frankfurt and Munich. air ticket was seen to have been purchased for Rs. 19,160 from Delhi and back. It was claimed before ld. ITO that for purchasing return ticket money was provided by assessee's father. It was also mentioned that expenses outside India were met by assessee's friend, Shri Chandra Prakash and Shri Mychla, Shri Manohar Shah, father of assessee vide his affidavit dt. 4th May, 1978 stated that his son was giving Rs. 50 per month regularly since 1961 and Rs. 10,000 was given to assessee by him (father) from cash collected from him. ld. ITO considered that there was no evidence exhibiting transaction of giving Rs. 10,000 to assessee by his father. On behalf of assessee it appears to have been contended that he was living in joint family with his farther and living expenses were met largely by father. ld. ITO further observed that there was on evidence about income of assessee's father. Thus addition of Rs. 10,000 was made with following observations: "It is seen that in view of meagre earning of Shri Manohar Lal Shah and including contribution made by sons of assessee, it was not possible for him to have saved amount of Rs. 10,000 for payment of foreign trip of his son which appears to only pleasure trip. There are also some incidental expenses for going abroad apart from purchase of ticket etc., but same is also not reflected from withdrawals of assessee. explanation given by assessee regarding payment of Rs. 10,000 by his farther for foreign trip is not acceptable and I, therefore make addition of Rs. 10,000 to declared income of assessee having been spent on foreign trip." said addition was subsequently contested by assessee and ld. AAC agreeing with reasons for addition refused to interfere. assessee is now in further appeal before us against said finding. On behalf of assessee, Shri Bal Krishna Bhargava, ld. Advocate repeated submissions earlier made before lower authorities and also invited our attention to copies of ration card of relevant period showing that assessee was living in joint mess with his father. Mention was also made of affidavit duly sworn in by Govindram, fair price shop owner stating that assessee's family used to collect ration from his depot and that in ration card of assessee's father assessee's name was there. Copies of statement of assessee and his father recorded by ld. ITO were also shown to be placed in record. It was Shri Bhargava's submission that assessee was living at relevant time with his father and savings were given to father and assessee was being maintained by father and father paid sum of Rs. 10,000 to enable assessee to purchase air ticket for going abroad. In Mr. Bhargava's opinion there was no justification either for making addition or for matter computing same. On behalf of Revenue Shri Satyandra Prakash, ld. departmental representative by and large supported actions of authorities below. It was also ld. representative anxiety to know as to how assessee obtained affidavit of depot holder and copies of ration cards etc. He had not much of point to make about affidavit of depot holder as well as statements of assessee and his father. Submissions have been heard and considered. After perusing copies of ration card and so also affidavit of Shri Govindram, depot holder it is possible to infer that at relevant time assessee was living in joint family of his father. Assessee's name prominently appeared in those documents. Assessee's father runs dairy farm and has been assessed to tax since asst. yr. 1962-63 as is clear from page 12 of paper book being order dt. 24th July, 1967 in his case. It is also seen that assessment for asst. yr. 1976-77 was completed at Rs. 16,900 and income of Rs. 10,000 from dairy was exempt. This evidence is sufficient to infer that assessee's father was having sufficient means to support family and to save also. father through his statement before ld. ITO specifically stated that he had given sum of Rs. 10,000 to his son. Assessee also stated same thing that his father gave Rs. 10,000 to assessee for purchasing air ticket. It is too much to expect that transaction of this type should be exhibited through some sort of document. submission of assessee appears to be correct that his father must have given sum to enable him to purchase ticket. ld. ITO was thus not justified to disbelieve it in that manner. learned AAC at least should have kept all these things in view while deciding issue. confirmation of addition is deleted. In result, appeal succeeds. *** LACHMAN DAS AHUJA v. INCOME TAX OFFICER