2023 (5) TMI 410

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ee before the date of its purchase itself. Thirdly, even if we go with the hypothesis that the assessee actually got the development work, then such development work should have been reflected in the description of the property in the sale deed, which is absent. In view of the foregoing reasons, we are satisfied that the AO was justified in not accepting the claim of indexed cost of development by the assessee. This ground is not allowed. Increase in the proportionate deduction u/s.54F because of the resultant increase in the amount of capital gain for the disallowance of the claim for indexed cost of improvement - AO is directed to verify such claim and allow the same as per law. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed an opport .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of bank account and invoices through which said development work was carried out, the assessee submitted confirmation from Pallod Associates, the developer, affirming that the development cost of Rs.2,40,000/- and Rs.3,00,000/- was incurred on 22-09-1998. The AO did not grant such deduction in the draft order because of the failure of the assessee to furnish any evidence as required by him. No relief was allowed by the Dispute Resolution Panel. The AO made the addition of Rs.9,17,560/- in the final assessment order. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The first issue raised by the assessee is against non-granting of deduction towards indexed cost of improvement. In this regard, it is observed t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... effect. This shows that, firstly, the assessee did not adduce any evidence of having done any development work on the property by furnishing the direct invoices for the development work. Secondly, even if it is presumed that the development work was actually carried out as claimed through the estimate/Bill of the developer, it is hard to accept that the development of the property was got done by the assessee before the date of its purchase itself. Thirdly, even if we go with the hypothesis that the assessee actually got the development work, then such development work should have been reflected in the description of the property in the sale deed, which is absent. In view of the foregoing reasons, we are satisfied that the AO was justified .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X