9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sold flats can be made in the hands of assessee. Disallowance u/s 40A(3) - exception for incurring cash expenditure of ₹ 20,000/- as given in Rule 6DD - HELD THAT:- It is an undisputed fact that the amount which has been disallowed by the AO has been made by the assessee through bearer cheque. Before us, assessee has not pointed out the provisions of Rule 6DD under which the payment can be allowed. He has also not pointed out any fallacy in the findings of Ld.CIT(A). We therefore find no reason to interfere with the order of Ld.CIT(A) - ITA No.2651/PUN/2017 - - - Dated:- 17-8-2020 - Shri Anil Chaturvedi, AM And Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, JM For the Assessee : Shri Suhas Bora. For the Revenue : Shri Sudhendu Das. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23(1) or 23(4) of the Act. 3. The ld.CIT(A) while confirming the addition has erred in not considering contention of the appellant, which was made without prejudice that even if deemed rent is to assessed u/sec.23(4), it is to be assessed on the basis of fair value adopted by the Municipal Corporation and not on estimated basis. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming an addition of ₹ 24010.00 u/sec 40A(3) on the ground that appellant had effected the payment by bearer cheque and appellant had failed to make out his case. 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the contention of the appellant that even if disallowance is to be made u/s 40A(3), it should be restricted to an amount exceeding ₹ 20000/-. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.L.V. at ₹ 1,68,000/- and taxed it as income from House Property . Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who following the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance reported in 39 Taxmann.com 303 upheld the order of AO. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is now before us. 6. Before us, Ld.A.R. reiterated the submissions made before AO and Ld.CIT(A) and further submitted that identical issue has been decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Gajendra Pawar in ITA No.1359/PUN/2018 dated 14.02.2019. He also placed on record the copy of the order of aforesaid decision. He therefore submitted that in view of the aforesaid decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in [2007] 164 Taxmann 342, the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of C.R. Developments Pvt. Ltd., (ITA No.4277 of 2012 order dt.13.05.2015) the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Housing and Construction reported in [2013] 29 taxmann.com 303 and other decisions cited in the order has held that when the unsold flats which are held as stock-in-trade and when the income from such unsold flats on its sale is treated as income from business , then no notional annual letting value in respect of unsold flats can be taxed under the head of income from house property . The relevant findings of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal is as under : 10. In the case on hand before us it is an undisputed fact that both assessees h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Forum. In view of the aforesaid facts, we following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Gajendra Pawar (supra), hold that in the present case no addition on account of deemed rent of two unsold flats can be made in the hands of assessee. We therefore set aside the addition made by the AO. Thus, the grounds 1 to 3 of the assessee are allowed. 9. Now we take up ground Nos. 4 and 5 which are with respect to disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act. 10. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO noticed that assessee had made payment of ₹ 24,010/- to New Maharashtra AIR Compressors through bearer cheque. The assessee was asked to explain as to why the same not be disallowed as the payment was not thro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
