9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... invited our attention to grounds no. 1 and 2 of its appeal memo and submitted that Assessing Officer had substituted the value of sale consideration with the value of sale deed for the purpose of stamp duty and had made addition and he had not confronted the assessee regarding the proposed addition whereas it has been specifically provided in proviso to section 50C that if the assessee claimed before any Assessing Officer that the value taken for the purpose of stamp duty is more than fair market as on the date of the transfer, the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of such capital assets to Valuation Officers. It was submitted that the authorities below without considering the provisions of section 50C had made and upheld the additi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer had disallowed by holding that no cash was withdrawn by assessee to incur expenditure whereas the Ld. CIT(A) had accepted that assessee had sufficient withdrawls to meet the impugned expenses but he upheld the action of Assessing Officer by taking a stance different from the Assessing Officer that no evidence was furnished to support the said expenditure from bank account. The Ld. AR submitted that while arguing before the Bench, it was argued that when the Assessing Officer's findings were confined to one aspect of the matter that the assessee had no withdrawls, and Ld. CIT(A), appreciating the facts and evidence on record, found the Assessing Officer's version to be prima-facie incorrect, then he ought to have deleted the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Ld. CIT(A) has also held that unless the assessee provides any evidence of low rates to show that his property was situated in a manner which would fetch lower rates than other comparable rates in the locality, the Assessing Officer was not bound to consider the same and in the absence of any such evidence or claim, he has upheld the action of Assessing Officer. The assessee before the Hon'ble Tribunal vide ground no. 1 has specifically taken up this issue to which the Hon'ble ITAT has adjudicated vide para no. 6.1 and wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal had held that assessee should have led some evidence to show that his property was situated in a manner which would fetch lower rates than other comparable rates in the locality and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no cash withdrawls for making the expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) on the other hand had held that the assessee had made cash withdrawls from his bank account but he has upheld the disallowance on the basis that the assessee had not shown to have incurred the expenditure through his bank account. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the disallowance on a different premise and Hon'ble Tribunal was requested to adjudicate on this issue as to whether Ld. CIT(A) can confirm an addition on a different premise. From the findings of order of Hon'ble Tribunal, we find that Hon'ble Tribunal has not given any finding in this respect and has upheld the action of Ld. CIT(A), therefore there is apparent mistake which needs to be rectified as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
