Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 65 - AT - Income TaxExpenses incurred on valuation of property – Held that:- No cross verification from the returns or accounts of Smt. Beena Devi who was the original owner of the property have been carried out to verify as to what amount was spent from her books, bank of account or cash in hand in respective years - This is so because the assessee is claiming 50% of expenses incurred by Smt. Beena Devi in defending and improving her title over the property - This becomes a crucial factor for ascertainment of claim of the assessee - There is no indication as to what has been done by department in the case of Smt. Shakuntla Golyan on these issues i.e. the another co-owner to whom half of the property was gifted by Smt. Beena Devi along with the assessee – thus, the matter remitted back to the AO for adjudication. Cash credits – Held that:- On one hand the CIT(A) finds fault with assessee's explanation that the documents were not filed before assessing officer and at the same time he has adverted to the merit of the documents that it amounts to giving contradictory findings - Besides, both the companies i.e. M/s Vitir Chattels Pvt. Ltd. and Nulon India Ltd. are claimed to be regularly assessed and family related concerns of the assessee - If the amount of Mr. Yash Golyan is lying in one of the family related concern i.e. Vitir Chattels Pvt. Ltd. and then transferred to another concern i.e. Nulon India Ltd. and both of them are assessed – thus, the assessee’s discharge of onus is to be weighed from the assessment record of these concerns – thus, the matter remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication – Decided in favour of Assessee.
|