TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition is warranted. In view of this factual position, CIT (A) deleted the addition and the Bench affirmed his stand. Thus, being on identical fact, find no merit in the appeal of the Revenue, consequently, dismissed - ITA NO. 1345/Mum/2014 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2015 - Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri A.K.Dhondial-CIT-DR For the Respondent : Ms. Shabnum Kedia ORDER Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by impugned order dated 20/12/2013 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. The only ground raised is that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deleting the addition made on protective basis in the hands of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chandbibi Zaidi was centralized. A bank account in the joint name of Ms. Ravish Zaidi and Chandbibi Zaidi was with Nova Scotia Bank, Nariman point Branch, Mumbai, was found. There were deposits to the tune of ₹ 23,71,427/-, including interest in the financial year 2004-05. The deposits were offered for taxation. The amount was held to be unexplained investment and thus added u/s 69B of the Act. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Before the ld. First Appellate Authority, the assessee vide letter dated 19/02/2013, claimed that the amounts were received back from Mumbai Majdoor Sabha, amounting to ₹ 10 lakhs which was invested in earlier years before 01/04/2001 and ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the submission of the assessee and remand report by the Assessing Officer, the impugned addition was deleted by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). No contrary evidence was produced by the Revenue in support of the ground raised, therefore, I find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). It is upheld. Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. I find that the facts and the issue is identical to the case of Ravish P. Zaidi, wherein, while coming to a particular conclusion, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) considered the remand report from the Assessing Officer who himself, on verification of accounts from the bank and other material found that no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
