TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the exemption - no material has been brought on record to controvert the findings of CIT(A) – thus, there is no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) – Decided against Assessee. Lump sum addition made on account of Low Household withdrawal – Held that:- The Assessee has submitted that he had made a withdrawal of 62,700/- for meeting the household expenses - A.O. found the withdrawals not commensurate with the requirement of the family and made an addition of Rs. 20,000/- on estimated basis which was also confirmed by CIT(A) - the estimate made by the A.O. was not based on any material on record and is also not supported by any evidence - even the submission of Assessee is also not supported by any evidence – thus, the addition i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances of the case in making and confirming the addition on account of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of immovable property of Rs. 7,16,394/- being 1/4th share of the appellant. 2. Both, the ld. A.O. and the CIT(A) have grievously erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in making and confirming the lump sum addition of Rs. 20,000/- on account of Low Household withdrawal. 1st ground is with respect to confirming the addition made on account of long term capital gain on sale of immovable property. 5. On the basis of AIR information, A.O. noted that Assessee had received sale consideration of Rs. 47,70,000/- on sale of immovable property. Assessee had not shown capital gain arising from it in the return of income. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). Before CIT(A) none appeared on behalf of Assessee and therefore CIT(A) on the basis of material on record dismissed the ground of the Assessee by holding as under:- 3.2 I have gone through the facts of the case. The basic facts as enunciated by the AO and reproduced in brief in para.3.1.1, above have never been rebutted by the appellant. The statement of facts is also .silent on these. It is clear that the land sold was not an agricultural land, nor was the subsequent land purchased. The value of the land purchased was also less than required for claiming the exemption. It is obvious that the appellant had as an afterthought tried to make a totally inadmissible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment proceedings, the Assessee was asked to furnish the details of family members and withdrawals made to meet the household expenses, in response to which Assessee submitted that his family members consisted of 4 members and had withdrawn 62,700/- to meet the household expenses. A.O. was of the view that considering the size of family and the standard of living, the withdrawals by the Assessee was found to be meager. He therefore made a lump sum addition of Rs. 20,000/- to the total income. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) upheld the order of A.O. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the Assessee is now in appeal before us. Before us, the ld. D.R. supported the order of A.O. and CIT(A). 9. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
