TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds CIT(A) Decision on Interest Income & Fixed Deposits Source</h1> <h3>ACIT, Circle-1 (2) Bhubaneswar Versus Md. Maffazalur Rahman And Md. Maffazalur Rahman Versus ACIT, Circle-1 (2) Bhubaneswar</h3> ACIT, Circle-1 (2) Bhubaneswar Versus Md. Maffazalur Rahman And Md. Maffazalur Rahman Versus ACIT, Circle-1 (2) Bhubaneswar - TMI Issues Involved:Assessment based on fixed deposits and interest income during a search, validity of additions made by Assessing Officer, appeal against Ld. CIT(A)'s order, source of fixed deposits, treatment of interest income, applicability of Supreme Court decision on revised return filing.Analysis:The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2008-09, where the revenue challenged the Ld. CIT(A)'s order regarding the addition of fixed deposits and interest income based on a search conducted on the assessee's premises. The Assessing Officer had included Rs. 6.5 crores from fixed deposits and interest income in the assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions citing the assessee's computation of income disclosing Rs. 9,16,66,750. The revenue contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions without proper explanation for the source of fixed deposits, especially concerning Rs. 1.5 crores in family members' names.During the hearing, the Ld. AR supported the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, arguing that the disclosed income adequately covered the fixed deposits and that the Rs. 1.5 crores in family members' names should not be attributed to the assessee. The Tribunal examined the submissions and noted the higher income disclosed by the assessee in the computation, leading the Ld. CIT(A) to enhance the assessment based on the disclosed income. Citing the Supreme Court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT, the Tribunal emphasized that without a revised return, the Appellate Authority could direct the Assessing Officer based on the computation of income filed during appellate proceedings.The Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision, confirming the treatment of interest income and the source of fixed deposits. It concluded that the additions made by the Assessing Officer were not justified as the fixed deposits were not in the name of the assessee but family members. Therefore, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objection of the assessee were dismissed, and the order was pronounced on 29/12/2022.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
