TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (7) TMI 725
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t u/s 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 5 lacs made on account of unexplained deposit in bank account. 3) a) The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 2. Adverting first to ground no.1 in the appeal, facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that a search u/s 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as the Act) was conducted in the premises of the assessee on 14.12.1999, when a number of documents were seized. Consequently, in resp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment order, written submissions filed by the AR, the Remand report of the AO, the rejoinder filed by the AR as well as the facts of the case and the position of law. In this respect it is observed that the AO's main contention is that though the assessee has filed the confirmation from M/s Expo Globe India Ltd. but source thereof remain unexplained, as no books of account of M/s Timely Fincap Pvt. Ltd. were produced before the AO during original assessment or before the present AO, the addition has been made. The appellant's main contention is that the AO made the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- U/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the strength of a loose sheet found and seized at Page no. 49 of Annexure-8, Party 1 which is a document whi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iven by the Hon'ble jurisdictional court as cited above in the case of Kulwant Rai. Even otherwise on merits the cheque in question has never been debited in the bank account of the appellant. The AO has taken the view regarding the seized document without corroborating evidence or follow up enquiry. The addition is therefore deleted and the ground taken is allowed." 4. The Revenue is now in appeal before us against the aforesaid findings of the ld. CIT(A).The ld. DR supported the order of the AO while the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee relied upon the findings of the ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard for both the parties and gone through the facts of the case. Indisputably, the amount was added on the basis of document seized during the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....companies on protective basis; though the Settlement Commission deleted the addition in the case of individual, in the hands of company amount remained unexplained. In these circumstances, the AO added the amount even in set aside proceedings after considering the submissions of the assessee. 7. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition after having a remand report from the AO and comments of the assessee thereon, in the following terms:- "13 I have considered the assessment order, written submissions filed by the AR, the Remand report of the AO, the rejoinder filed by the AR as well as the facts of the case and the position of law. In this respect it is observed that the Assessing officer himself in his order at Page 3 para 2 ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elhi-110055 was a declared account in the balance sheet of the appellant and the return filed on 30-10-1999 before the date of the search (14.12.1999) to the department from which this amount has been seized. The list of rulings cited by the appellant also lend substantive support to the appellant's plea on this ground. The addition therefore cannot be upheld and the ground is therefore allowed." 8. The Revenue is now in appeal before us against the aforesaid findings of the ld. CIT(A).The ld. DR supported the order of the AO while the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee relied upon the findings in the impugned order. 9. We have heard both the parties and gone through the facts of the case. Indisputably, the cash of Rs. 5 lacs was seized....