2022 (7) TMI 395

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, New Delhi, for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under: 1. Ld/CIT(A) did not consider; notice issued u/s 148 was time barred which is bad in law. 2. Ld/CIT(A) did not consider; the assessment order, demand notice u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 was unsigned and invalid. 3. Ld/CIT(A) did not consider our explanat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... deposited amount of Rs.18 lakhs in an account held in Bank of India. Thus, based on such information, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. In course of assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to explain the source of deposit made in the bank account. In response to the query raised by the Assessing Officer, the assessee furnished .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d money under section 69A of the Act and added back to the income of the assessee. Addition so made, was also upheld by learned Commissioner (Appeals). 4. Before us, learned counsel for the assessee submitted, the assessment was reopened to assess the deposits of Rs.18 lakhs in the account held with Bank of India. He submitted, in course of assessment proceeding, the assessee had furnished docume .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... made investment of Rs.18 lakhs in fixed deposits with Bank of India, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act. In course of assessment proceeding, the assessee furnished documentary evidence and submitted that the fixed deposit made is of Rs.3 lakhs and not 18 lakhs. On cross verification with the bank, the Assessing Officer having found assessee's claim to be cor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed Juned Dadani, (2013) 355 ITR 172 (Guj.) 2. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd Vs CIT, 336 ITR 136 (Del. HC) 8. Respectfully following the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decisions, I have no hesitation in holding that the addition made of Rs.6,49,177/- is unsustainable. Accordingly, I delete the addition. Ground is allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above. Order pronounc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X