TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 390X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t tax was accepted by the A.O. after considering the explanation and statement of assessee. Therefore, without justification, the A.O. should not have rectified the order for withdrawing such benefit to the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, correctly followed the order of the ITAT, Kolkata Bench in the case of Narendra N. Thacker (2015 (11) TMI 62 - ITAT KOLKATA). Since, the issue was highly debatable before the A.O, therefore, in such circumstances, A.O. should not have pass the rectification order under section 154 of the I.T. Act. No infirmity have been pointed out in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, confirm the same and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue. - ITA.No.452/Del./2016, C.O.No.117/Del./2016 And ITA.No.452/Del./201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il, 2012 at Aryan Sainik Group. The assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961, was completed and income was computed at ₹ 15,31,56,140 and no demand was raised. Later on, an order under section 154 was passed on 9th June, 2015 wherein credit of self-assessment tax of ₹ 2,60,00,000 being cash seized during the search was withdrawn and a demand of ₹ 3,22,34,580 was raised. 2.1. The assessee aggrieved against the order passed under section 154, filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and it was explained that A.O. has erred in not allowing or withdrawing the credit of ₹ 2.60 lakhs being cash seized during the course of search and claimed as self-assessment tax in ITR filed under section 153A. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... note that adjustment of tax has already been given in intimation issued under section 143(1) of the I.T. Act. The Ld. CIT(A) considering the explanation of assessee in the light of order of ITAT, Kolkata Bench in the case of Narendra N. Thacker dated 28.09.2015 in I.T.(SS)A.No.1/Kol/2012, allowed the appeal of assessee. His findings in paras 5 and 6 of the order are reproduced as under : Finding : 5. I have gone through the above submissions made by the Ld. Counsel of the appellant it is observed from the details furnished during post search proceedings, assessment proceedings and proceeding u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 that the appellant has on various occasions requested for adjustment of cash seized of ₹ 2,6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted that ITAT, Kolkata Bench in the case of Narendra N. Thacker (supra) held that adjustment of seized cash as selfassessment tax is in order. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions, we do not find any merit in the departmental appeal. It is an admitted fact that assessee since the day of the search till the regular assessment is made, requested the Revenue department to adjust ₹ 2.60 crores found during the course of search as self-assessment tax. The assessee also made similar claim in the return of income filed under section 153A of the I.T. Act which have been accepted by the A.O. while passing the assessment order under section 153A/143(3) dated 30th March, 2015. Thus, the claim of assessee has been accepted for adjus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
