Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 1044 - ITAT CHENNAIAddition u/s 69 - unexplained investment - Held that:- The statement is not relatable to any seized material and therefore the statement cannot be the basis for making any addition. Considering the above decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. K. Bhuvanendran & Others reported in [2006 (12) TMI 127 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ], we do not have any hesitation to delete the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer, which was further sustained by the Ld. CIT (A) because the statement of the assessee was not based on any seized material, but a blend admission to the opinion imposed by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Further, the Revenue has not produced any material before us other than the statement of the assessee to establish that the assessee had paid on-money. Accordingly the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer for U/s. 69 of the Act stands deleted - Decided in favour of assessee
|