2021 (11) TMI 51

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cer of Rs. 1,51,56,830/- for the A.Y. 2016-17." 3. From perusal of the aforesaid ground raised by the Revenue, it is taken note that the Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) who deleted the protective addition made by the AO of Rs. 1,51,56,830/-. 4. Brief fact of the case as noted by the AO is that the assessee has filed the return of income on 2.03.2018 showing total income of the assessee at Rs. 4,62,800/-. The AO noted that the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and reason for scrutiny selection "substantial cash deposit in the bank account". The assessee pursuant to the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, in this regard brought to the notice of the AO that the savings bank account no. 33727278376 has been opened for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....asis to safeguard the interest of revenue and he also observed in the assessment order that the substantive addition would be made by the respective AO of M/s Society of Education (Alpha Beta College) and that the information regarding this is being passed to the that AO of the college and thus he made protective assessment in the hands of the assessee to the tune of Rs. 1,51,56,830/-. 6. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who was pleased to hold that in the absence of any prior substantive addition in the case of M/s. Society of Education, no protective assessment could have been made by the AO in the hands of assessee and, therefore, the action of the AO is bad in law and, therefore, he deleted the same. 7.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Services Private Limited [I.T.A. No.44/DEL/2014 dated 05/06/2017, it was held/averred, as follows, by the Hon'ble ITAT-Delhi: We further note that the analysis of the investment account reveal that the company has made investment of Rs. 5,04,01,000/. The statement given by Sh. PN Jha assumes importance wherein he categorically admitted that the company was doing the business of investment and finance and during the year the bank accounts of the company have been used to provide the accommodation entries. The addition of Rs. 3,17,67,951/- made by the Assessing Officer on protective basis, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law, because in this case the AO himself stated in the assessment order that the Department is looking after the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cie holds the opinion that the income is rightly taxable. Having done so and with a view to protect the interest of the Revenue, if the AO is not sure that the person in whose hands he had made the substantive addition rightly, he embarks upon the protective assessment. Thus the protective assessment is basically based on the doubt of the AO as distinct from his belief which is there is the substantive assessment." In the case of Gregory & Nicholas vs. ACIT [I.T.A. No.5102/Mum/2006 &IT(SS)A No.24/Mum/2009 dated 01/03/2007], it was held/averred, as follows, by the Hon'ble ITAT (Mumbai): "21. In the case of Suresh K. Jaju (2010) 39 SOT 414(Mum), E-Bench of the Tribunal at page 532 to 533 held as follows: "The AO made the following o....