TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowing the expenditure incurred towards land levelling, construction of wall and a room - Held that:- Evidences are submitted before the authorities to show that there existed compound wall and room adjacent to the land - thus the matter is remitted back to AO to determine the value with the assistance from DVO with reasonableness and allow the same as cost incurred to build the compound wall and a room - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose - ITA No. 1066/Hyd/2017 And ITA No. 1067/Hyd/2017 - - - Dated:- 23-5-2018 - SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri Sanjay Mutha For The Revenue : Smt. B. Vishnu Priya ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M.: Both these appeals filed by the assessees are directed against a common order dated 02/01/2017 of CIT(A) 9, Hyderabad for AY 2006-07. ITA No. 1066/Hyd/2017 2. Briefly the facts of the case are, the AO observed that during the AY under consideration, the assessee along with two other family members had entered into a sale cum general power of attorney with M/s Mahanagar Realtors in respect of property at Sy.No. 96, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngly, the AO worked out the cost of improvement at ₹ 6,32,732/-. 2.7 Further, the assessee had claimed an amount of ₹ 3,06,000/- being fees paid towards advocate. On verification of the vouchers produced, the AO noticed that the assessee had produced an affidavit for only ₹ 1,06,000/- and produced self made vouchers for the balance amount. Accordingly, the AO accepted ₹ 1,06,000/- towards fee paid to Advocate against ₹ 3,06,000/- claimed by the assessee. 2.8 Assessee claimed expenditure of ₹ 4,45,600/- towards land levelling, construction of compound wall and a room. From the details submitted by the assessee, AO noticed that the assessee claimed the above amount based on self made vouchers and hence, the AO disallowed the same. 2.9 Apart from the above additions, the AO made other disallowances/additions, which are not subject matter of appeal. 3. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) passed a consolidated order in both the appeals under consideration, as under: 4. As regards the adopting the value as per SRO for the purpose of 50C, the CIT(A) observed that the claim of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Sec 5OC is with respect to disputes with unrelated parties, and not with respect to disputes within the family which the commissioner (appeals) has erroneously believed, while considering the appeal. The appellant begs to submit that certified copies of the court orders of dates subsequent to the date of sale have been submitted before the income tax officer which is clearly articulated in the remand report by the assessing officer. These facts has been completely not considered by the commissioner (appeals) while rejecting the plea made by the assessee that he had to sell the property under extreme distress because of several unresolved disputes, police cases and litigation for more than 20 years. 2. The Id. CIT (Appeal) has erred in confirming the view taken by learned ITO, in allowing of ₹ 1,06,OOO/- only out of the total expenditure incurred towards advocate fee of ₹ 3,06,000/- on the basis that the remaining amount is supported only by self made voucher. The Assessee begs to point out that the fees paid is acknowledged by the recipient and it is humbly submitted that the CIT(appeals) ought to have appreciated that for litigating in more than 10 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such adjustment and submitted that it was not brought on record any encumbrance certificate or issue before AO. He relied on the orders of revenue authorities. 10. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is noticed that assessee has sold the property with the disputes in the property. This property was having disputes within the family and outside parties claiming to be the owners. The same was demonstrated by the assessee before the AO during remand proceedings. The same was acknowledged by AO in his remand report. The assessee has filed a paper book of ownership documents of various people, list of complaints filed. Even though, AO has not expressed his opinion in the remand report. Further, it is noticed that ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the matter merely confirming the disputes within the family. But, we notice that there are disputes with outside parties who were claiming the ownership. Assessee has settled the issues with the few but some disputes were unsettled at the time of sale, which is evident from the list of cases pending for which the court orders were submitted subsequent to the date of sale. In our view, the assessee is eligible to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
