TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 1109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any incriminating material warranting addition. Under these circumstances, we hold that all the additions made by the Assessing Officer were not in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA Nos.1065, 1066 & 1067/Mds/2014, ITA No. 1093/Mds/2014, ITA Nos. 1068, 1069 & 1070/Mds/2014, ITA Nos. 1071, 1072 & 1073/Mds/2014, ITA No. 1091/Mds/2014, ITA No. 1089/Mds/2014, ITA No. 1092/Mds/2014 - - - Dated:- 5-2-2015 - B. R. Baskaran (Accountant Member) And Vikas Awasthy (Judicial Member) For the Petitoner : G. Baskar (Adv.) For the Respondent : P. B. Sekaran (CIT) ORDER All these appeals filed by the assessees and also at the instance of the Revenue are directed against the orders passed by Ld. Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not based on any incriminating material found during the course of search. Accordingly, he submitted that the additions made by the Assessing Officer as well as that confirmed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) are liable to be deleted. 3. The Ld. counsel also submitted that in the case of M/s Viswams and M/s AREMKAY, the Assessing Officer had disallowed the revenue expenditure by treating the same as capital expenditure. The Assessing Officer has taken a clue in this regard from a revision order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) under Section 263 of the Act. The Ld. counsel submitted that the respective assessees had filed appeals challenging the revision order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals) and the Tribunal has quashed the revision orders. In the prese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is pertinent to note that Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jai Steel (India) v. ACIT (259 CTR 281) and also Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Murali Cargo in I.T.A. No. 36/Mum/2010 dated 29.10.2010 have also expressed identical views as that Mumbai Special Bench referred above. 6. In view of the above, all the additions made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment years under consideration are liable to be set aside. We order accordingly. 7. Since we have set aside all the additions, we do not find it necessary to address issue relating to disallowance of revenue expenditure on the basis of revision order. 8. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed and appeals filed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
