Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1708 - ITAT MUMBAIDisallowance of business loss - revenue submits that there was no business during the year. The assessee has not proved the expenditure that the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business and no documentary evidences was furnished by the assessee - in the return of income the assessee has shown the income under the head “Income from House Property” and under the head “Income from Other Sources” in its Profit & Loss A/c - HELD THAT:- As per Profit & Loss A/c, the assessee offered income under two heads only (i) Income from House Property and (ii) Income from Other Sources. In the Profit & Loss A/c, no business income was shown. As the assessee is already allowed the benefit under section 24(a). Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) concurred with the finding of Assessing Officer. Before us the assessee has neither furnished any documentary evidence nor disclosed the details particulars of new business venture which was undertaken by the assessee. No name or municipal number of property in connection of which the assessee allegedly selected for such business venture. Moreover, while perusal of details of expenses, we have noted that the assessee has claimed depreciation, remuneration to Directors, appeal fees, audit fees, professional fees and telephone expenses. All the expenses were included in the standard deduction claimed by the assessee. In our view, the assessee failed to substantiate the business activities as no details particulars regarding the alleged new business venture undertaken by assessee is furnished. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the ground of appeal raised by assessee. Disallowance of claim of interest under section 24(b) - assessee submits that the assessee purchased a property known as Dhanwatay House - from which date, the assessee is eligible to claim interest on the loan - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that the agreement for acquisition of part of Dhanwatay House was executed only on 31.03.2008. There is no dispute that during the relevant period that the assessee has offered the rental income of part of Dhanwatay House. The intention of assessee was further to let out the property and to earn the rental income. In our view, when the availing of finance and payment interest thereon is not in dispute the assessee is entitled for interest allowance irrespective of fact that finally agreement to sale for change of ownership was executed subsequently. Therefore, in our considered view, the assessee is entitled for proportionate allowance of interest on the payments of ₹ 5.28 Crore paid to Vedant Property Pvt. Ltd. Hence, the Assessing Officer is directed to compute the interest allowance from the date of payment i.e. on 14.02.2008. In the result, this ground of appeal is allowed. Determination of capital gain - NIL returned by the appellant - HELD THAT:- Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee again not furnished any documentary evidence in respect of transfer/surrender of property. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer holding that in absence of any documentary evidence and on the basis of receipt on substantial payment, the transfer was within the period of three years. The ld. AR of the assessee vehemently argued before us that variation is only on account of capitalization of interest. Before us, the assessee failed to disclose the date of acquisition of different share of Dhanwatay House in earlier Assessment Year i.e. 2008-09, 2009-10 or 2010-11. In absence of any documentary evidence, we are unable to convince ourselves about the allowance of capitalization of interest for Assessment Year 2010-11 & 2011-12. In the result, ground of appeal raised by assessee is dismissed.
|