9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellery as short term capital gain that too without giving benefit of cost of acquisition - HELD THAT:- Assessee filed two purchase bills wherein the year of purchases is 1998. In view of this, we direct the AO to compute the long term capital gain considering Sale Consideration Less Index Cost of Acquisition. Enhancing the income of the assessee on account of interest income of the assessee - HELD THAT:- We find that in the remand report dated 20/02/2020, the Assessing Officer stated that the assessee has received interest income which has not been included in the total income. CIT(A) observed that in the reply filed by the assessee in response to the remand report, has not made any comment on this issue and hence the addition was confirmed. Assessee fairly accepted that the addition be confirmed. Consequently, no interference is warranted in the order of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. Thus, ground no.4, is dismissed. Enhancing the income of the Appellant on account of income from house property from the houses owned by the Appellant - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) has granted sufficient opportunities to enable the assessee to counter the remand report which the assessee failed to do so an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Addition is restricted to ₹ 88,309, as income from house property and ₹ 25,202, towards interest aggregating to ₹ 1,13,511. So the assessee gets relief of ₹ 6,68,783. - Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member And Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member For the Assessee : Shri Kapil Hirani For the Revenue : Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya ORDER PER BENCH The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned orders of even dated 07/08/2021, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Nagpur, [ learned CIT(A) ], for the assessment year 2010 11, 2011 12, 2013 14 and 2014 15 respectively. ITA no.105/Nag./2021 Assessee s Appeal A.Y. 2010 11 2. The assessee has raised following grounds: 1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the entire assessment framed and the additions to the extent confirmed are bad in law and liable to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2) The Ld. AO grossly erred in making and the Ld. CIT(A) 3, Nagpur grossly erred in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs. 5,00,000 treating the same in the nature of unexplained deposits in bank account ignoring the submission of the Appellant. The source ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Department. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of information from the two bank accounts in Central Bank of India and State Bank of India and on the basis bank extracts of the accounts of the assessee, treated the receipt of ₹ 7,29,500 as income of the assessee for the year under consideration, as the assessee failed to file his return of income. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the first appellate authority. 6. The learned CIT(A) stated in his order that the learned Authorised Representative has filed explanation for the deposits in the bank account which is summarised in the table below: S.no. Bank details Account Number Total Receipts (₹ ) Source explained by the appellant Income earned Loan obtained Sale of Jewellery Contra Entries 1. Central Bank of India 3061529168 7,29,500 1,000 5,00,000 93,500 1,35,000 Total: 7,29,500 1,000 5,00,000 93,500 1,35,000 7. The learned CIT(A) held that since the learned Authorised Representative has not filed any documentary evidence in support of the loan of ₹ 5 lakh claimed to have been received by the assessee, therefore, the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2020, the Assessing Officer stated that the assessee has received interest income of ₹ 68,568, which has not been included in the total income. The learned CIT(A) observed that in the reply filed by the assessee in response to the remand report, has not made any comment on this issue and hence the addition was confirmed. The learned Counsel for the assessee fairly accepted that the addition of ₹ 68,568, be confirmed. Consequently, no interference is warranted in the order of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. Thus, ground no.4, is dismissed. 16. Insofar as ground no.5, is concerned, we find that the learned CIT(A) has granted sufficient opportunities to enable the assessee to counter the remand report which the assessee failed to do so and hence the direction of the learned CIT(A) on this issue is found appropriate and no interference is called for in the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, ground no.5, is also dismissed. 17. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010 11 is partly allowed. ITA no.106/Nag./2021 Assessee s Appeal A.Y. 2011 12 18. The assessee has raised following grounds: 1) On the facts and circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of ₹ 68,662, is hereby sustained and no interference is called for in the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue. 20. Insofar as the computation of capital gain on the basis of the value adopted for registration process, we find that there is a difference between sale consideration of ₹ 14,43,000 and value as per registration is at ₹ 18,75,500. We strongly feel that it was bounden duty of the Assessing Officer to refer the matter to the Valuation Officer in accordance with the judgment of the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in Sunil Kumar Agrawal v/s CIT, 372 ITR 83 (Cal.). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer and direct him to re compute the capital gain in accordance with law. 21. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011 12 is partly allowed. ITA no.107/Nag./2021 Assessee s Appeal A.Y. 2013 14 22. The assessee has raised following grounds: 1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the entire assessment framed and the additions to the extent confirmed are bad in law and liable to be quashed in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal A.Y. 2014 15 29. The assessee has raised following grounds: 1) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the entire assessment framed and the additions to the extent confirmed are bad in law and liable to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2) The Ld. AO grossly erred in making and the Ld. CIT(A) - 3, Nagpur grossly erred in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs. 7,82,294 treating the same in the nature of unexplained deposits in bank account ignoring the submission of the Appellant. The source of the amounts totalling to Rs. 7,82,294 being from explainable sources, the addition confirmed deserves to be deleted in the interest of justice. 3) The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of appeal with the kind permission of the Hon'ble Tribunal. 30. Grounds no.1 and 3, being general in nature, hence no adjudication is required. 31. Ground no.2, relates to addition of ₹ 7,82,294, on account unexplained deposits in bank account. 32. The Assessing Officer has made the addition with respect to sum total of credits appearing in the bank account of the assessee. 33. The learned CIT(A) granted sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
