Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 259 - ITAT AGRAAddition of interest on FDRs Held that:- The matter requires reconsideration at the level of the AO - the assessee pointed out to the computation of income in which the income from business was shown at ₹ 67,310/- which includes the bank interest of ₹ 44,763/- which is supported by profit and loss account - assessee has shown interest under the head 'business' as well as income from other sources - This point is not examined by the authorities below from the record and there appears some mistake on the part of the authorities below in not appreciating the contention of the assessee order set aside and the matter remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication Decided in favour of Assessee. Addition made in the capital account Held that:- The issue also requires reconsideration partly at the level of the AO - The assessee pointed out that from the joint account, cheques No. 205279 was credited to the personal account of assessee of ₹ 26,000/- and similarly, ₹ 1,00,000/- was transferred through cheques No. 205280, but the joint account statement shows the amount of this cheques was ₹ 631/- only order set aside and the matter remitted back to the AO for re-adjudication Decided partly in favour of Assessee. Addition made u/s 68 of the Act Unexplained cash credits Held that:- The amount of ₹ 1,20,000/- was transferred from account of Mrs. Veena Khokha and from her bank account and the amount of ₹ 1,20,000/- was transferred on 04.11.2008 and similarly on 21.03.2009, there was a transfer of ₹ 1,00,000/- through cheques - the assessee submitted that no proper opportunity was given to explain this issue - Considering the bank accounts, the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the AO the order set aside and the matter remitted back to the AO for re-adjudication Decided in favour of Assessee. Addition made out of total addition Held that:- The addition has been correctly made in the matter assessee pointed out that to show the account of Ankit Khokha from where another deposit of ₹ 1,50,000/- was made on 02.02.2009 - the assessee has not been able to contradict the finding of the ld. CIT(A) that the entry of ₹ 1,50,000/- was not appearing and source of cash deposited of ₹ 25,000/- was not explained - In the absence of any evidence on record to explain both these entries, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of ₹ 1,75,000 Decided against Assessee. Computation of LTCG of residential property Held that:- In the absence of any evidence of cost of construction, no further relief could be given to the assessee - the assessee, however, produced a duplicate copy of the valuation report (unsigned) and requested that the same may be admitted as additional evidence to give benefit of higher cost of construction in favour of the assessee - The request cannot be accepted - It is photocopy duplicate valuation report and is not signed by any person also, the valuation report cannot substitute actual cost incurred by the assessee towards the construction - In the absence of any proof regarding construction cost of such house and any investment made therein, would clearly disentitle the assessee from any relief Decided against Assessee. Long term capital gain Claim of Deduction Application u/s 154 of the Act pending - Held that:- There is no question for the CIT(A) to have decided the issue of ₹ 20,00,000 - the CIT(A) was not required to adjudicate upon such alleged ground of appeal - The ld. counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee has moved application u/s. 154 before the CIT(A) which is still pending - Let the assessee may pursue his application given before the CIT(A) Decided against Assessee.
|