9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 940X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c manner also deserves to be remanded back to on same reasoning and should be decided afresh after considering the assessee’s explanation as well as the material on record. Thus, following the Tribunal order in assessee’s appeal, ground no. 1 is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) which decide afresh. Addition on protective basis - CIT-A has deleted the addition made on protective basis on the ground that the same has been confirmed by him in his appellate order in the case of Smt. Kiran Jain and Shri Vikram Jain - Held that:- The matter should be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) who shall decide the same after taking into consideration the Tribunal’s order in assessee’s case and decide accordingly. If th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) That the appellant craves to add, delete or modify any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 2. Before us the ld. CIT DR, submitted that during the course of search and seizure action which was conducted on 19.2010 in the case of the assessee and others, cash amounting to ₹ 15,22,500/- was found from the residential premises of the assessee, which has been added by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee could not properly explained source of such cash. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has deleted 50% of the cash on estimate basis on the ground that to this extent cash can be said to be explained and balance 50% was confirmed him. He brought to our notice that in assessee s appeal, challenging the addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thdrawals from M/s. Jain Manufacturing Company, which is the partnership concern, while part of the cash belong to M/s. Kanin India Ltd. The break-up of the cash was given in the following manner:- Jain Manufacturing Co., Ludhiana (JMC): ₹ 7,92,782 Kanin India Ltd. Doraha (KIL): Jaininder Jain Family ₹ 4,00,000 ( Cash for household exp.): ₹ 3,29,798 Total: ₹ 15,22,580 However, the ld. Assessing Officer confirmed the entire addition of ₹ 15,22,580/- on the ground that the assessee could not properly explained the source of cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... left it open-ended. The ostensible break-up of the cash was furnished during the assessment proceedings. The contention of the assessee that for security reasons part of the cash of the family concerns is kept with the Directors/partners to my mind is quite acceptable. Further there will some withdrawals for house hold too. Therefore considering the entire gamut of the facts and circumstances, I would think it reasonable to consider 50% of the cash found as explained. Thus, assessee partly succeeds on this ground of appeal. 5. We find that the Tribunal in assessee s case has set aside this matter to the file of the Learned CIT(Appeals) after observing and holding as under:- On consideration of the rival submissions, we are of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich has been deleted by the Ld. CIT (Appeals) on ad-hoc manner also deserves to be remanded back to on same reasoning and should be decided afresh after considering the assessee s explanation as well as the material on record. Thus, following the Tribunal order in assessee s appeal, ground no. 1 is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) which decide afresh. 7. So far as the deletion of the addition of ₹ 2.25 crores made by the Assessing Officer on protective basis, we find that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has in fact upheld the addition of ₹ 1.25 crore in assessee s hands and has deleted the addition made on protective basis on the ground that the same has been confirmed by him in his appellate order in the case of Smt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
