AMIT KUMAR SAHA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 62(1),, KOLKATA

At the time of hearing, we note that appeal is barred by limitation of 789 days and the assessee has filed an affidavit along with condonation petition before us. We observe from the said affidavit that the mother of the assessee was diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma in 1st week of July, 2024 and subsequently, she was suffering from multiple bilateral modular Meta stresses and still suffering from Cancer. Finally, after considering the

The only issue pressed at the time of hearing is Ground No.6, which is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.80,64,400/- by ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO on protective basis in the hands of the assessee.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We note that in this case the addition was made in the hands of the assessee of Rs.80,64,400/- on protective basis and substantive addition was made hands of the firm M/s Kashipati Shaw and Tarun Kumar Shaw. We note that the addition was made in the hands of the firm in respect of cash deposits in the bank account, which belonged to the firm. The AO noted that as the first name in the bank account is of Anil Kumar Saha and that addition made on the protective basis in the hands of the assessee. We note that the addition made substantively in the hands of the firm M/s Kashipati Shaw and Tarun Kumar Shaw in the assessment order passed u/s 147/144/144B of the Act, dated 24.03.2023 has become final and therefore, the protective addition made in the hands of the assessee is to be deleted. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition made by AO.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.