2015 (12) TMI 1802 - AT - Income Tax

Addition made on protective basis - amounts deposited in the joint bank account with Ms Chandbibi Zaidi - assessee is a student studying outside India, with no independent source of income - Held that - As considered the remand report in the cases of assessee as well as Ms Chandbibi Zaidi and also the other material placed before us during the course of hearing. We find that the CIT(A) has decided the appeals of assessee for three assessment years i.e. 2005-06 to 2007-08 by common order and the appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2007-08 has already been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee by dismissing the appeal of the Revenue. We find that the issue before us and in the decision of Tribunal for AY 2007-08 are identical and nothing contrary to the findings of the Tribunal or CIT(A) has been placed by the ld. DR to deviate from the finding of the ld. CIT(A) or the Tribunal. The remand report in the case of Ms Chamndbibi Zaidi has also been considered by the Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the issue in favour of the assessee. On perusal of the remand report, we find that the AO had made verification of all the amounts for which the additions were made by him in the assessment order, and nothing wrong has been reported by the AO in his remand report. It was alleged by the AO in the assessment order that the impugned amounts for which the addition had been made in the hands of the assessee, actually belonged to Ms. Chandbibi Zaidi. Thus, as per the AO s own assertion, these amounts did not belong to the assessee. Thus, no addition deserves to be made in the hands of the assessee, in any case. - Decided against revenue

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against common order dated 20.12.2013 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-37, Mumbai for assessment years 2005-06 & 2006-07.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were directed against the deletion of additions made on a protective basis in the hands of the assessee regarding amounts deposited in a joint bank account, jointly held with another individual, without appreciating the source of income of the assessee, who was a student studying abroad.
2. A search action under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 revealed a bank account jointly held by the assessee and another individual, with unexplained deposits. The case was reopened under section 147, and the Assessing Officer added the deposits as unexplained investments. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the additions after considering the remand report and submissions of the assessee.
3. The Ld. CIT(A) passed a common order for three assessment years, and the Tribunal had already decided in favor of the assessee for one of the years. The remand report confirmed that the deposits did not belong to the assessee, leading to the deletion of the additions by the Ld. CIT(A).
4. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, as the amounts in question were not owned by the assessee, based on the AO's own assertion. The additions were deemed wrongly made and were rightly deleted. The appeals filed by the revenue were dismissed.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved in the appeals, the facts of the case, the arguments presented, and the ultimate decision reached by the Tribunal.