2015 (6) TMI 1185 - AT - Income Tax

Addition made on protective basis - amount deposited in the joint bank account with Ms. Chandbibi Zaidi - assessee is a student, studying outside India, with no independent source of income - Unexplained credits - Unexplained investment - Addition u/s 69B - search and seizure action u/s 132 (1) - HELD THAT - We find that the facts and the issue is identical to the case of Ravish P. Zaidi 2015 (6) TMI 1184 - ITAT MUMBAI wherein, while coming to a particular conclusion, CIT (A) considered the remand report from the Assessing Officer who himself, on verification of accounts from the bank and other material found that no addition is warranted. In view of this factual position, CIT (A) deleted the addition and the Bench affirmed his stand. Thus, being on identical fact, find no merit in the appeal of the Revenue, consequently, dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition made on protective basis in the hands of the assessee regarding amount deposited in a joint bank account.

Analysis:
- The Revenue appealed against the order of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, dated 20/12/2013, concerning the deletion of an addition made on a protective basis in the hands of the assessee for the amount deposited in a joint bank account with Ms. Chandbibi Zaidi. The Revenue contended that the assessee, a student studying abroad with no independent income, should not have had the addition deleted without proper interpretation of the remand report of the Assessing Officer.
- During the appeal hearing, the ld. DR for the Revenue reiterated the grounds raised, while the counsel for the assessee defended the decision of the First Appellate Authority. The counsel argued that the issue was similar to another case, Ravish P. Zaidi, where the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. The ld. DR did not contest this assertion.
- Upon reviewing the submissions and the available material, it was found that the facts and issue were indeed identical to the case of Ravish P. Zaidi, where the Revenue's appeal was rejected. The Assessing Officer, after verifying accounts and other documents, found no grounds for addition, leading to the deletion of the amount in question by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). As no contradictory evidence was presented by the Revenue, the decision to delete the addition was upheld.
- The judgment concluded that since the facts were the same as in the case of Ravish P. Zaidi, where the Assessing Officer's report did not justify any addition, the deletion of the addition by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was appropriate. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed based on the identical factual circumstances and the absence of evidence supporting the grounds raised.

This detailed analysis of the legal judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, the findings based on the assessment of facts, and the ultimate decision reached by the Tribunal.