9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... findings recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) that since the income was to be assessed under the head “income from other sources”, deduction under Section 24(1) of the Act was not allowable. - ITA No. 87of 2016 - - - Dated:- 15-3-2017 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. RAMENDRA JAIN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. S.K. Mukhi, Advocate and Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. The appellant-assessee through the instant appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) impugns the order dated 03.11.2015, Annexure A.3, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench D (in short, the Tribunal ) in I.T.A. No.73 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer and submitted relevant details. The assessee firm is getting income from job work shown from the sale and purchase of PU soles, hawai chappals, sandals and shoes etc. It is also getting rental income from Agra Building given on rent to M/s Liberty Group Marketing Division, its sister concern. The assessee declared income of ₹ 7,21,675/- from its business, ₹ 78,000/- as income being rentals. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish details of opening stock, purchases and closing stock. The assessee filed the relevant details. The Assessing Officer held that closing stock as well as opening stock shown by the assessee was not correct. The Assessing Officer made addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the orders of the entire material available on record. The case of the assessee is that the order of the Assessing Officer is altogether arbitrary and he has based his assumption on the fact that the closing stock in full and good shape was available with the assessee which is factually incorrect as the samples of rejected goods were personally produced before him for inspection and it was requested that he should depute his staff member for verification of write off/rejected goods which has conveniently been not mentioned in his orders. The Assessing Office has altogether ignored the fact that assessee was closing down its business and has disposed of the entire stock by means of organizing open clearance sales. The fact that business was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disallowance of claim under Section 24(1) of the Act against rental income derived by the assessee at ₹ 78,000/-, the Tribunal concurred with the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) that since the income was to be assessed under the head income from other sources , deduction under Section 24(1) of the Act was not allowable. The relevant findings recorded by the Tribunal read thus:- 14. Ground No.5 is against the confirmation of disallowance under Section 24(1) against rental income derived by the assessee at ₹ 78,000/-. 15. Facts relating to this ground are that the assessee declared rental income of ₹ 78,000/-. The Assessing Officer did not allow deduction under Section 24(1) of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
