SHRI ANIS ZIKAR GHANIWALA,AMARAVATI vs. DY. C.I.T CENT CIR AMRAVATI NOW ADDL CHARGE A,C,I,T C.C.2 NAGPUR, NAGPUR

The only common issue in these three appeals of the assessees is as regards the order of learned CIT(A) in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the opening capital amounting to `50,000/- in ITA No.156/Nag/2016, `46,548/- in ITA No.159/Nag/2016 and `1,39,921/- in ITA No.3/Nag/2016 for assessment year 2001-02 as unexplained.

Since the facts and circumstances are exactly identical in all these appeals, hence, we will take up the facts from ITA No.156/Nag/2016 and decide the issue.

We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Brief facts are that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment u/s 153C of the Act treated the opening capital as on 01.04.2000 declared by the assessee at `68,000/- as unexplained. Finally, the Assessing Officer treated the sum of `50,000/- as unexplained for the reason that the assessee could not prove that this amount is received from his father by way of will or any other evidences. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before learned CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. We find from the facts of the case that the assessee has filed capital account from financial year 1992-93 to 2000-01 explaining the opening balance. We are of the view that opening balance cannot be added in the

In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 08.03.2018.

The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R. Assistant Registrar