Sekar Jayalakshmi (Smt.) v. ITO (2023) 221 TTJ 1025 /150 Taxmann. com 120 (Chennai)(Trib)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Cash credits-Unexplained investment-Assessing Officer made addition to income of assessee in respect of certain credit entries as unexplained credit-Commissioner (Appeals) could not have treated said addition as unexplained money under section 69A as he was not empowered to change provision of law qua item of which assessment was made. [S. 68, 69A]

Held that Commissioner (Appeals) is not empowered to change provision of law qua item of which assessment was made. Therefore, in absence of such power, Commissioner (Appeals) could not have treated addition under section 69A and therefore, same was liable to be deleted Even otherwise since assessee had furnished confirmation of her husband by way of duly notarized affidavit regarding credit entries and lower authorities failed to discharge their onus by getting details from bank and therefore, addition under section 69A is directed to be deleted. (AY. 2011-12)