TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt - Held that:- AO had also found that the appellant had deposited a sum of 12,30,500/- in another bank account. The appellant’s case is that this amount was deposited out of the sale consideration of a plot or land which was sold for 75,68,761/-. The appellant’s further case was that he had a half share and that the deposit was made from the sale proceeds received by him. The appellant also cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted the contention that the AO ought not to have treated the cash deposit as income without considering the cash withdrawals from the same bank. The CIT (Appeals), therefore, fairly granted the appellant relief by directing the AO to make addition of only peak of the deposits in the bank account after getting the details from the appellant. These are pure questions of fact which require the appre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort term capital gain. The appellant's case regarding these transactions are purely questions of fact. The CIT (Appeals) in fact again directed the AO to allow ₹ 12,85,500/- on account of cost of acquisition of the earlier property and granted the appellant relief to that extent. The cost of acquisition of the new property was, therefore, reduced from half of the sale price taxed by the AO a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|