I'm in a discipline where it is common to make preprints publicly available on arXiv as soon as they're ready to be submitted to a journal, so naturally I list them on my CV. Before the review comes in I would just list the paper as "Preprint" and after it's been officially accepted I would list it as "To appear in XYZ". I wonder what is the best course of action between those two states, that is, after the paper has received positive reviews but there are still corrections to be applied and it has not been officially accepted (but I'm willing to bet that it will be). Is it reasonable mention that the paper is "Submitted to XYZ" in such a case? That has the benefit of providing more complete information, and is definitely a statement that I can justify if pressed. Or is it always preferable to stick with "Preprint" until officially accepted?
No, do not list the journal you submitted it to. Frankly, it means nothing: anyone can submit anything to any journal.
Of course, you want to your CV to accurately reflect how much work you've been doing lately, but there's always a chance that the paper gets rejected in the in-between phase. A good enough compromise is to just post the arXiv info, when it was revised (this reflects that it's been recently reviewed), and perhaps "Accepted." Once you get the proofs, you can change to "To appear in [Journal]."