9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 557X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titled for deduction of interest – there was no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) as the interest is claimed by the assessee is not allowable in view of the fact that the Explanation to clause(b) of section 24 of the Act speaks about the constructed property - the property of the assessee has not been constructed – Decided against Assessee. Disallowance of unexplained investment – Held that:- The AO has given a finding that the interest- bearing funds were utilized for construction of bungalows which was not for business purpose - the assessee is having business of transport, thus, the addition made by the AO on the basis that the assessee has utilized the borrowed fund for non-business purposes cannot be find any fault – Relying upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. 4. The Learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs.78,000/- on account of interest on money borrowed for non- business purpose, i.e. construction of self occupied property. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify any of the Grounds of Appeal. 3. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated 29/12/2006, thereby the Assessing Officer(AO) made additions/disallowances in respect of interest u/s.40A(2)(b) of the Act, interest claimed on self-occupied property and interest on account of excess borrowing. Against this, assessee filed an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or construction of self- occupied property. 6.1. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the authorities below are not justified in making addition. 6.2. On the contrary, ld.Sr.DR submitted that the assessee has claimed interest on the property which was not completed during the year. He pointed out that both the authorities below have given finding on fact that the property was not constructed. Therefore, the interest in respect of property under construction is not allowable u/s.24(b) of the Act. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the AO has given finding on fact that the properties were not constructed, therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght to have allowed benefit of the disclosure/additions made in the firm of M/s.Tirupati Construction Co. It is therefore prayed that the additions confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted. 9.1. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated 23/12/2008, thereby the Assessing Officer(AO) made addition of Rs.2,56,365/- on the basis that the assessee has utilized the interest- bearing fund for non-business purpose. Against this, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, dismissed the appeal. 10. The ld.counsel for the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
