9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances of the case, it will be in the interest of equity and justice to reduce the travelling expenses to ₹ 4,654/-. Thus the assessee will get the partial relief of ₹ 10,000/-. Hence, the ground no. 1 of the assessee is partly allowed. Long Term Capital Gain on sale of gold after allowing the indexed cost of acquisition - Held that:- CIT(A) computed the indexed cost of acquisition at ₹ 7,58,400/- . From the records submitted by the assessee, it is observed that the assessee had purchased 300 gms. Gold in F.Y. 2006-07 and 1000 gms. Gold in F.Y. 2004-05 whereas the 800 gms is sold during the year. The ld. CIT(A) is therefore, justified in holding that 800 gms. gold sold during the year is out of the gold purchased in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances of the present case, the delay of 2 days in late filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned. 3.1 Apropos Ground No. 1 of the assessee, the facts as emerges from the order of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- 3.3 I have perused the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. The Assessing Officer examined the expenditure under the head travelling expenses of ₹ 1,46,539/-. A disallowance of 20% was made for personal use and cash payments. After perusing the contentions of the assessee and the AO s order, it is felt that 20% of disallowance is on the higher side and the same is restricted to 10%. Hence this ground is partly allowed. 3.2 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... however, the Assessing Officer has held that the sale was made from the bill of 1000 gm and the cost has been taken as per the bill but the year of indexation has been taken as financial year 2006-07 i.e. relatable to the purchase bill of 300 gm. The Authorized Representative has requested that the indexation should be taken from financial year 2004-05 in which the initial purchase was made. He has also submitted a calculation sheet which is reproduced as follows: Sale consideration (Gold) 800 gms enclosed Sale invoice vide PB No. 21 to 23 16,05,130 Less: purchase of Gold (purchased dated 08.09.2006 300 gms of ₹ 2,81,850@ 939.50/gm) and indexed amount is 2,81,850x711=3, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d thus made the addition of ₹ 2,97,398/- to the Long Term Capital Gain computed by the assessee. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee claimed that indexed cost of acquisition should be taken at ₹ 8,60,118/- and thus Long Term Capital Gain should be computed at ₹ 6,86,642/- . However, the ld. CIT(A) computed the indexed cost of acquisition at ₹ 7,58,400/- . From the records submitted by the assessee, it is observed that the assessee had purchased 300 gms. Gold in F.Y. 2006-07 and 1000 gms. Gold in F.Y. 2004-05 whereas the 800 gms is sold during the year. The ld. CIT(A) is therefore, justified in holding that 800 gms. gold sold during the year is out of the gold purchased in F.Y. 2004- 05 by following the FIFO method. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
