9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the addition made by the AO was not sustainable which was rightly deleted by the CIT(A) during first appellate proceedings - Decided against Revenue. - ITA NO. 68/DEL/2011 - - - Dated:- 25-2-2015 - Shri B.C.Meena And Shri C.M.Garg JJ. For the Appellant : Sh. Vikram Sahay, Sr. DR. For the Respondent : Shri P.K. Mishra, CA ORDER Per C.M.Garg, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal has been preferred by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - XVII dated 29.10.2010 in appeal no. 188 / CIT(A) XVII/ Del/ 2009-10 for assessment year 2002-03. 2. The revenue has raised following grounds in this appeal :- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of AVN AMRO bank in which the amount has been deposited. The assessing officer noted that the assessee had not filed the copy of account of J R D Stock Brokers and their bank statement. The AO after examine the explanation and details submitted by the assessee concluded that there was an arrangement between the assessee and M/s J R D Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. to take entry from a bogus concern and the assessee made cash payment to the said broker and in turn the assessee received cheque from such entry provider. The AO treated the entire amount of ₹ 52,54,284/- the income of the assessee and the same was added to the return income of the assessee for the year under consideration. 4. The assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irst appellate proceedings as additional evidence. The Ld. AR, further, contended that the CIT(A) asked the AO to submit remand report and comments on the additional evidence and the assessing officer did not made any adverse comment therefore, the same was rightly admitted and considered by the CIT(A) while allowing appeal of the assessee. Supporting the impugned order the Ld. AR vehemently contended that while the AO could not bring any positive evidence on the record to substantiate his conclusion and the Director of M/s J R D Stock Broker Pvt. Ltd. in his statement recorded on oath by the AO has confirmed the transaction entered into by the assessee then the baseless addition made by the AO cannot be sustained. 7. On careful consider ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kers (P) Ltd. However, the AO could not bring any positive evidence on the record to substantiate his conclusions. On the contrary the director of M/s JRD Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. in his statement recorded on oath by the AO has confirmed the transaction entered into by the appellant. He has also submitted the copy of the account of appellant and copy of contract note and bills in respect of sale and purchase of the shares. In view of the above facts, I am of the view that the addition made by the AO cannot be sustained. Therefore, the addition made by the AO is deleted. This ground of appeal is allowed. 8. In view of above and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) gra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
