9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sold as an agricultural purpose. This is highly exaggerated amount which has been claimed by the assessee without submitting any evidence. Similarly the assessee has claimed that he must have filled the land with sand for leveling purposes though no direct evidence has been placed on record. The assessee could only produced his account as well as account of his sons wherein their books, they have claimed incurred expenditure but the assessee could not bring any demonstrative evidence exhibiting that some physical changes were brought in the asset. Considering the well reasoned finding of the CIT(A) vis-à-vis the claim made by the assessee, we are of the view that ends of justice would meet if a sum of ₹ 1,50,000/- is allowed to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on 27th March 2006 for a sum of ₹ 6,00,000/-. It was sold on 22nd January, 2008 for a sum of ₹ 31,65,800/-. The land sold by the assessee is an agricultural land. The assessee had computed short-term capital gain of ₹ 2,88,415/-. He claimed expenditure of ₹ 28,77,315/-. This claim was made on account of improvement made in the land. The AO rejected this claim on the ground that assessee failed to substantiate the alleged expenditure incurred for improving the land. 3. On appeal the ld. first appellate authority has reappreciated the facts and circumstances of the case and concurred with the AO. The discussion made by the ld. CIT(A) in paragraph 2.3 2.4 is worth noting in this regard. 2.3 The appellant du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377; 7,12,315/- expenses incurred out of own account + ₹ 7,50,000/- expenses incurred by his son Nitin Patel + ₹ 7,10,000/- expenses incurred by his son Himanshu Patel) whereas in the concluding para, the claim was made for ₹ 28,77,315/-. I have gone through the copies of the bills and vouchers and noticed that the details are for the expenditure of ₹ 29,28,911/- out of which payments for ₹ 28,48,815/- were stated to be made. Out of the total expenses of ₹ 29,28,911/- the expenses of ₹ 6,00,000/- were for the cost of land and there is no dispute about it, the expenses of ₹ 70,000/- were stated to be incurred on stamp duty (no source of incurring of expenses) ₹ 35,000/- for Advocate fees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the land. Likewise the expenses of ₹ 70,000/- stated to be incurred on stamp duty (no source of incurring of expenses), ₹ 35,000/- for advocate fees (no bill or money receipt or no source of expenditure) and ₹ 1,55,750/- stated to be incurred for fertilizer and matipuran and construction of wall and gate (no bills or vouchers and no any details of dates of expenditure and source of expenditure) cannot be allowed for the reasons mentioned against them in bracket. It is also to be mentioned here that the land was purchased and sold by the appellant. The expenses incurred by his sons on the construction of any dwelling units cannot be allowed to the appellant in the name of improvement expenses. 2.4 Considering the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for improvement of the asset. The ld. counsel for the assessee has reiterated the stand of the assessee canvassed before the ld. first appellate authority. She took us to paragraph 2.1 of CIT(A) s order where submissions of the assessee have been reproduced. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR relied upon the order of CIT(A). 6. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances we are of the view that ld. first appellate authority has made a detailed analysis of each item of expenditure claimed by the assessee towards the improvement of the asset as well as incurred in connection with the transfer. It is to be appreciated that assessee has claimed expenses of ₹ 1,55,750/- incurred towards fertilizer and matipuran. The total land ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
