2014 (4) TMI 630

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee on account of addition made towards the unexplained opening balance. 2. The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that to add the unexplained opening capital balance the requirement of seized material is not necessary. 3. The CIT(A) ought not to have considered the decisions of various ITATs as they are against the statutory provision of section 153A of the IT Act. 4. The order of the CIT(A) is not acceptable on the ground that in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s Ch. Marthanda Rao & Co., IT Act, 1961 No. 780 to 784/Hyd/2010 the jurisdictional ITAT has given its categorical finding that the total income shall be assessed or reassessed as per section 153A of the IT Act." 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that in the assessment order ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on the ground that there is no seized material indicating the suppression of income and the addition is not based on any material of undisclosed income. More so, it is the opening balance for the year under consideration which was accepted by the Department when the original return of income was filed and no incriminating material was found during the course of search to disturb the capital account balance since the same was accepted by the Department. Against this, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 6. We have heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the record. The finding given by the CIT(A) is justified as there is no seized material to disturb the opening capital balance, which was accepted by the Department in the origina....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....991-91 and treat it as unexplained income, but it cannot treat the opening balance in the AY 1991-92 as unexplained. The learned counsel for the assessee strongly supported the order of the CIT(A). 6..............The tribunal held that the Assessing Officer has failed to take cognizance of the return for 1990-91, while deciding the issue of 1991-92 as the return was before him. The opening balance of cash cannot be treated as unexplained in the assessment year 1991-92. In view of this position, we have no hesitation in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and reject the ground taken by the Revenue." 6.1 In view of the above discussion, we dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue against the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition mad....