9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ially similar to the facts involved in earlier case of Smt. C. Prabhavathi. In fact, the CIT (A) has followed the order passed by the first appellate authority in case of assessee's wife. - Decided against the revenue. - ITA No.886/Hyd/11 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2013 - Shri Chandra Poojari And Shri Saktijit Dey,JJ. For the Appellant : Smt. Maya Maheswari For the Respondent : Sri S. K. Pissay ORDER Per Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of CIT (A), Vijayawada dated 28-2-2011 passed in appeal No. 208/CIT(A)/Tr/VJA/10-11 pertaining to the assessment year 2003-04. 2. The department has filed the appeal on the following effective grounds:- 1. The learned CIT (A) erred i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uential order was served on the assessee on 23-11-2007. However, on 14-3-2008 an order u/s 154 dated 15-11-2007 was served on the assessee wherein the Assessing Officer rectified the consequential order dated 15-11-2007 by withdrawing the set off of Rs.31,40,600/- by holding that no peak credits were available for set off against the advances given outside the books of account. 5. The assessee challenged the order u/s 154 of the Act before the CIT (A). In course of hearing of the appeal, the assessee contended before the CIT (A) that identical issue in case of the assessee's wife for the same assessment year 2003-04 was subject matter of appeal before the CIT (A)-VI, Hyderabad and the CIT (A) has decided the issue in favour of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hyderabad Bench. The co- ordinate bench of the Tribunal in ITA No.404/Hyd/2011 dated 23-11- 2012 upheld the order of the CIT (A) by holding in the following manner:- "14.We have heard both the parties and perused the record. From the records, it is clear that the CIT (A) in his order dated 14-9-2007, in the first round of appeal, had clearly given a direction to adjust against the addition of Rs.30,45,000/-, peak cash credit which was also available outside the books of account and assessed to tax once it was recorded in the books of account. The directions of the CIT (A) are clear. He has directed that the peak credit taxed in the earlier years should be reduced from the addition of unexplained advances of Rs.30,45,000/-. There is no amb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
