9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Records of various persons. AO erred in making the addition of the aforesaid amount of ₹ 69,92,195/- without proper reasoning, and in the absence of any evidence to show that the Jewellery found was unaccounted or unexplained or undisclosed. AO had no basis to make the addition, when the Jewellery found is fully disclosed in Wealth Tax Records. In view of the foregoing, there is no material to warrant any interference by us with the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that in view of the facts and circumstances of this case, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is sound in law - decided against revenue. - ITA No:- 1175/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 31-1-2019 - SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTAN ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02.2014 : The cash found during the course of search we would like to draw your kind attention to the working sheet in respect of assessee wise cash found during the course of search and working sheet in respect of cash in hand as per the books of account of those assessee whose name is appearing on the working sheet of department on the date of search, as per which the cash in hand as per books of account was ₹ 2,57,87,960/- and cash found during the course of search is ₹ 66,32,819/-. As such cash found during the course of search is less than the cash in hand as per books of account as such the same needs no intervention . 4.1 I have gone through the above submissions and found no force in it as an amount of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who, vide impugned order dated 18.12.2014, deleted both the aforesaid additions of ₹ 5,05,550/- and ₹ 69,92,195/-. The relevant portions of the order of Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: 5.1 During the course of search cash amounting to ₹ 5,05,550/- was found from the residence of the appellant but was not seized. As per the books of account regularly maintained by the appellant, the cash balance as on 01.08.2011 was ₹ 5,74,762/-. The AO has disbelieved the claim of the appellant and made the addition without assigning any reason or citing any evidence. The books maintained by the appellant have also not been questioned or rejected. It is to be noted that in the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The addition made is erroneous and is deleted. (3) Now, Revenue has filed this appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT , for short), in which the following grounds of appeal have been raised: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in:- I. The order of the CIT(A) is not correct in law and facts. II. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of cash found seized during the course of search seizure operation amounting to ₹ 5,05,550/- made by AO on account of unexplained cash. III. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of ₹ 62,92,195/- made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05,550/- is fully explained by cash balance, as on 01.08.2011. The AO erred in making addition of the aforesaid amount of ₹ 5,05,550/-, without any reasoning and in the absence of any evidence to show that the cash found was unaccounted or unexplained or undisclosed. Similarly, the Jewellery found from the premises of the Assessee is also fully explained by Wealth Tax Records of various persons. The AO erred in making the addition of the aforesaid amount of ₹ 69,92,195/- without proper reasoning, and in the absence of any evidence to show that the Jewellery found was unaccounted or unexplained or undisclosed. The AO had no basis to make the addition, when the Jewellery found is fully disclosed in Wealth Tax Records. In view of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
