9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame of the wife, particularly when lady is a house wife and no regular source of income is proved. A.O. keeping in view of the observations made by the ITAT, called the assessee to explain the source of investment. The assessee s wife was not able to substantiate the source. Therefore, based the observation made by the Hon ble ITAT, assessment was completed. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has given partial relief. We find that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). This ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. Loss incurred in business in the block assessment period for set off against the income - assessee has submitted that the loss incurred by the assessee in his business in the block assessment period may be set off against the income - HELD THAT:- We find that the A.O. has passed the consequential order in respect of the construction of the Tenali House property keeping in view of the observations made by the Hon ble ITAT. From the ITAT order this issue is not emanating, therefore, this ground raised by the assessee cannot be adjudicated. Therefore, this ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns reached by the first appellate authority were partly based on surmises. There is no evidence on record to suggest that the assessee s wife had some independent source of income. It is trite law that in the case of housewife it is the customary practice of house holder to purchase properties in the name of wife. The maxim Vir et uxor censentur in lege una persona (husband and wife are considered one person in law) deserves to be taken note of while considering the issue of investment claimed to have been made in the name of wife, more particularly when the lady is housewife and no regular source of income is proved. The learned CIT(A) having ignored these aspects, we hereby set aside his order and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. 4. Subsequently, A.O. has completed the assessment afresh after giving opportunity to the assessee. It was submitted before the A.O. by the assessee that for the purpose of acquiring the land and construction of the house, he has submitted the source of Rs. 40,000/- was his wife s stridhanam and accumulated agricultural income of Rs. 35,000/- and other loans borrowed for the amount of Rs. 2,55,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ularly when the lady is housewife and no regular source of income is proved. This decision is rendered by the Hon ble Tribunal after considering the arguments of the assessee that there is no evidence to suggest that the property was owned by husband. The argument of the assessee that addition if any can only be made in the hands of Smt. Usharani was considered by the Hon'ble Tribunal before giving this decision regarding the source of income of Smt. Usharani. Thus I am of the firm opinion that neither can the AO nor can the CIT(A) sit on judgment of the issue on which the Hon'ble Tribunal has already decided. The Tribunal in this case decided that husband and wife are considered as one person especially in the light of the fact that no regular source of income is proved in the case of wife. Thus I will not be able to consider the arguments of the assessee regarding the ownership of property at this stage. The only issue that will be left for consideration is the value of the property as per the valuation certificate found during search proceedings. The market value of the site and building is estimated at ₹ 2,74,848/- and ₹ 3,79,355/- respectively. The property ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... direct the AO to allow 15% deduction from the gross construction cost arrived at by DVO. AO is further directed to allow 10% deduction for self supervision towards own purchase of material and execution of work instead of 6% deduction given by DVO. Thus AO is directed to arrive at the value of the property as follows Gross value as arrived by DVO : Rs.5,85,387/- Less: 15% deduction for difference between CPWD and local rates : ₹ 87,808/- Rs.4,97,579/ Less : 10% deduction for self-supervision, Purchase of material : ₹ 49,756/- Rs.4,47,823/- AO is thus directed to adopt total investment in site and building at ₹ 5,33,430/-(RS.85,630/- site + ₹ 4,47,800/- building) instead of ₹ 8,24,848/- adopted by him in the assessment order. Thus this ground is partly allowed. 7. On being aggrieved, assessee carried m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the Ld. CIT(A), keeping in view of the specific observations made by the ITAT that there is no evidence of record which suggest that assessee s wife had some independent source of income. It is trite law that in the case of house wife, it is the customary practice of house holder to purchase property in the name of the wife, particularly when lady is a house wife and no regular source of income is proved. The A.O. keeping in view of the observations made by the ITAT, called the assessee to explain the source of investment. The assessee s wife was not able to substantiate the source. Therefore, based the observation made by the Hon ble ITAT, assessment was completed. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has given partial relief. We find that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). This ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. 11. So far as ground no.4 of the appeal is concerned, appeal raised by the assessee is relating to the loss incurred in business in the block assessment period for set off against the income. The relevant ground is extracted as under: The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam, ought to have entertained the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
