9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... machinery, and furniture. AO in his remand report thereafter stated that the claim of the assessee is not verifiable and hence, not acceptable. We therefore find that the AO had some apprehension about the value of such plant and machinery and furniture and in order to verify the same, had issued the summons to the purchaser, however due to death of the purchaser, the sale consideration could not be verified. However, he has not disputed the fact that such assets have been found recorded in the assessee s books of accounts as on the beginning of the year and have since been disposed off way back in 2008, therefore, mere apprehension cannot be a basis to deny the fact that these assets have been sold at the stated consideration as evidenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the ld. assessing officer has erred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in considering the sale consideration of ₹ 46,64,700/- in place of ₹ 32,51,000/- as claimed in the return of income and ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the same. 2. That the ld. assessing officer has erred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in not considering the short term capital loss on account of sale of machinery of ₹ 3,45,423/- and the ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the same. 3. That the ld. assessing officer has erred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in not considering the short term capital loss on account of sale of furniture of ₹ 33,083/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7,500/- Short term capital loss 3,45,423/- 33,083/- 5. It was submitted that the opening WDV is verifiable from the assessment records and in support of the sale, the receipt from the purchaser of these items was furnished before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report reproduced at Para 4.3, Pg 12 of the CIT(A) order. The AO in the remand report observed that assessee has submitted handmade kachha receipt/ voucher regarding sale of furniture machinery dt. 10.08.2008 14.08.2008. For verification, summons were issued to Sh. Kamal Chand Garg who purchased these items but it is informed by the A/R of Sh. Kamal Chand Garg that he has since expi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her, the assessee has filed evidence by way of receipt from the purchaser regarding the old machinery and furniture sold to him which is admitted by the AO in the remand report. Otherwise also, when the entire factory land building is sold, it is incorrect to assume that old machinery and furniture are not sold. Therefore, the disallowance of short term capital loss confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) is not correct and the same be directed to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that the assessee has failed to file the return of income by the due date and no evidence was brought on record that old machinery and furniture was ever sold and even in the remand proceedings, the claim of the assessee of sale of old machinery furniture cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had some apprehension about the value of such plant and machinery and furniture and in order to verify the same, had issued the summons to the purchaser, however due to death of the purchaser, the sale consideration could not be verified. However, he has not disputed the fact that such assets have been found recorded in the assessee s books of accounts as on the beginning of the year and have since been disposed off way back in 2008, therefore, mere apprehension cannot be a basis to deny the fact that these assets have been sold at the stated consideration as evidenced by the sale receipts. Similarly, the findings of the ld CIT(A) that no evidence for sale of plant and machinery was brought on record is incorrect as the assessee has submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
