9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in giving relief to the assessee by deleting the disallowance of Rs. 44,22,711/- for AY 2013-14 & Rs. 45,56,529/- for AY 2014-15 claimed under section 36( 1 )(iii) when the assessee company has not produced any evidence regarding the transaction for validating the claim that it arose out of a family settlement during FY 2007-08 during the assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not giving opportunity to the AO under Rule 46A for verifying the claim of the impugned family settlement during appellate proceedings. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the assessee was not able to establish the nexus between the business and the loans and the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... debited interest, the Assessing Officer worked out proportionate interest to be disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act at Rs. 44,22,711/- and brought to tax. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance. 3. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. DR submitted that during the course of appellate proceedings, by considering the submissions and evidence on the transaction for validating the claim that transaction arose out of a family settlement during the financial year 2007- 08, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance made under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act without giving an opportunity to the Assessing Officer, which is in violation of the Rule 46A and pleaded for setting aside the appellate order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 2.16 crores. The assessee has not registered the sale deed. Thus, the assessee was sought for to submit the guideline value adopted in the computation, which was submitted by the assessee as of and valid between 01.08.2007 to 31.03.2012 for the survey numbered plots for which the sales took place during the above period with the valuation ranging from Rs. 500 per sq. ft. to Rs. 750 sq.ft. However, after noticing from the website, the revised guideline values after 01.04.2012 @ Rs. 3000 per sq. ft. for the above said plots sold, the Assessing Officer determined the consideration at Rs. 3,96,00,000/- [3300 x 4 plots x 3000] and Rs. 4,75,20,000/- [3960 sq. ft. x 4 plots x Rs. 3000] and arrived the capital gains at Rs. 8,54,21,990/-. Acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deration and date of registration for transfer of capital assets are not same, value adopted or assessed or assessable by stamp valuation authority on date of agreement may be taken for purpose of computing full value of consideration for such transfer seeks to relieve the assessee from undue hardship and, thus, should be taken to be retrospectively effective. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court, the Assessing Officer is directed to examine the issue in line with the above judgement and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the ground raised by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
