9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 302X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ong Term Capital Gains. Short Term Capital Gain on house property after claiming repair expenses - CIT (A) confirmed the disallowance made by the AO on the grounds that even during the appellate proceeding, the assessee was unable to justify the claim by producing relevant documentary evidence in support of repair expenses - HELD THAT:- Assessee has made payment to four parties on account of the repairs undertaken in the property which has been sold for which the Short Term Capital Gains have been offered to tax. CIT (A) would have been inadvertently ignored the payments made while confirming the disallowance in absence of anything contra brought by the revenue about the payment of the repair charges to the four persons mentioned ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not gone into the merits of the case and merely referred to the applications of the appellant for keeping the penalty proceedings in abeyance. (c) She has failed to understand that the Assessing Officer has levied the penalty on the basis of additions made during assessment without appreciating that the additions made u/s 153A were itself bad in law as the same were made without referring to any incriminating material. (d) She has failed to understand that merely because AO did not accept exempted income without referring to any material brought on record, penalty cannot be levied on the basis of disallowance u/ s 10(38) of the Act. 2. That the penalty order made u/s 271 (1)(c) as well as the order of the CIT(A) is required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old property at Karol Bagh, Dariwalan, Sidhipura, New Delhi an its repair was essential for selling the property. (b) She has further failed to appreciate details of account payee cheques paid to various persons for repairing the building which was claimed against Short Term Capital Gain. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of ₹ 55,115 /- made by the AO u/ s 14 A of the IT Act by applying Rule 8 D of the IT Rules because: (a) She has failed to appreciate that disallowance u/s 14 A cannot exceed the exempted income. (b) The assessee itself has made the disallowance of ₹ 9, 054 /- which was actually incurred to earn the incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a 42,000 /- 2. 05.07.2010 119092 Mr. Anil Kumar 40,000 /- 3. 05.07.2010 119093 Mr. Neeta Sharma 40,000 /- 4. 05.07.2010 209899 Mr. Yogesh Kumar 42,000 /- Total 1,64,000 /- 8. The ld. CIT (A) would have been inadvertently ignored the payments made while confirming the disallowance in absence of anything contra brought by the revenue about the payment of the repair charges to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
