Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (4) TMI 248 - ITAT HYDERABAD

2016 (4) TMI 248 - ITAT HYDERABAD - TMI - Computation of capital gains - authentication of documents - Held that:- The assessee has claimed only ₹ 1,70,00 as brokerage, which amount was increased to ₹ 2 lakhs. Had these receipts been genuinely paid and received at that point of time, the assessee would not have made any claim at incorrect amount of ₹ 1,70,000. Therefore, the authenticity of the receipt itself is doubtful. As already stated, no corroborative evidence is furnishe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ken sale consideration at a lesser amount in the original return. Even though there are certain claims made in the original computation itself, since they are not supported by any evidence, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed the same. When these were pointed out to the learned counsel, in the course of arguments, he has submitted that the Assessing Officer could have disallowed some amount and allowed the balance. This itself indicates that there is no genuin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has furnished certain evidence of transfer of money from Tuni and Vizag to the assessee, but it does not establish that these amounts are indicative of the agricultural operations by the assessee to that extent. Moreover, the learned CIT(A) finds that the Authorised Representative submitted that the agricultural land has been leased out to various parties and filed confirmation from the lessors. But, as seen from the documents placed in the paper-book, these are not lease rentals received from .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ordingly uphold their orders and reject the grounds of the assessee on this issue.- Decided against assessee - ITA No.1466/Hyd/2014 - Dated:- 1-3-2016 - SHRI D.MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant by : Shri S.Rama Rao For The Respondent by : Shri M.Sitaram ORDER Per D.Manmohan, Vice President : This appeal is filed at the instance of the assessee and it is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Incometax( Appeals) IV, Hyderabad dated 13. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cordingly this ground is treated as withdrawn. 3. Facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are stated in brief. Assessee has filed return of income admitting capital gains, in which originally assessee took the sale consideration at ₹ 85 lakhs and claimed ₹ 1,70,000 as brokerage and ₹ 5,20,000 towards cost of improvement. Assessee admitted long term capital gains at ₹ 52,51,271. Later on, assessee filed a revised return in the course of assessment proceedings, admi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he expenditure so incurred, the Assessing Officer took the original cost of the plot and re-worked the long term capital gains at an amount of ₹ 83,21,038. 4. Another issue which was also considered by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order is regarding the agricultural income declared at ₹ 10,56,000. The Assessing Officer asked for evidence for agricultural land holdings and also agricultural receipts and expenditure thereon. Assessee did not furnish any evidence and the Asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent of property at ₹ 5,20,000. He filled certain documents in support of the claim by way of quotations from some Maistries and entries in a note book as additional evidence. With reference to the agricultural income, assessee filed certain receipts addressed to the assessee by his accountant, dispatching money on sale of certain agricultural produce. This additional evidence was not considered by the CIT(A), as assessee has neither explained why they were not filed before the Assessing Of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d on record, it was the submission of the learned counsel that the assessee did spend the amount towards brokerage and also towards compound wall and construction of a house. It was fairly admitted that there was no electricity nor there was any permission from municipality for such construction. Even before us, except placing the documents in the paper-book there is no prayer for admission of additional evidence. As seen from the documents placed on record also, these are not authenticated docu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ny revenue stamp, even though the amount of payment is more than ₹ 50,000. In view of that, the brokerage receipts cannot be accepted as authenticated documents, so as to consider them in the course of appellate proceedings. 8. As seen from the original claim also, the assessee has claimed only ₹ 1,70,00 as brokerage, which amount was increased to ₹ 2 lakhs. Had these receipts been genuinely paid and received at that point of time, the assessee would not have made any claim at .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ok to the extent of ₹ 5,20,000 includes slab worth ₹ 2 lakhs, towards doors & windows and also compound wall of ₹ 35,000. Against this quotation, note book entries of payments from 20.4.1989 to 30.9.1989 to an extent of ₹ 5,20,000 were placed in the paper book from pages 13 to 17. Here also, there is no authenticity about the payments nor identity of the person, who was stated to have received the amounts. As admitted, the assessee has not obtained permission from mun .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

re not sure how many houses assessee has constructed on the said land and how many times he has constructed, because both the quotations involve the same work at different times and the assessee claims to have incurred expenditure, as per those papers. If so much amount is incurred, sources for the amounts should have been mentioned in evidence of the payments. Nothing was done by the assessee. In fact, when the Assessing Officer asked for evidence, nothing was placed on record, indicating that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the Assessing Officer could have disallowed some amount and allowed the balance. This itself indicates that there is no genuineness in the claim. Therefore, we are not inclined to consider the assessee s contention on the above two claims, As already stated, since the documents were not admitted by the CIT(A) as additional evidence, this forum also cannot admit the same as the documents, in the absence of any prayer for admission as additional evidence. In view of this, we uphold the orders .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version