TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appropriate indexation while computing capital gains u/s 48. - Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - ITA. No. 120/JP/2019 - - - Dated:- 28-2-2020 - Shri Vijay Pal Rao, JM And Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM For the Assessee : Shri Praveen Saraswat (C.A.) For the Revenue : Miss Chanchal Meena (JCIT) ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-III, Jaipur dated 28.12.2018 for the assessment years 2010-11 wherein the limited issue for consideration is non-grant of deduction of interest expenditure as part of cost of construction while computing capital gains U/s 48 of the IT Act. 2. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... do- 16,998/- A TOTAL (a+b+c) 15,96,667/- B SALE VALUE UNDER 50C 14,73,240/- LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN (LOSS) B-A 1,22,427/- ITR was filed by the assessee claiming loss of ₹ 7,15,181/- after applying indexation on Purchases cost + interest + expenses. 5. It was further submitted that the notice U/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31/03/2017. The AO rejected the claim of Interest and other expenses holding in the assessment order dated 16/11/2017 as under : but as per the IT Act, 1961 all the payments made towards repayment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both provisions are altogether different. 147/2015 AY 2011-12 G Bench, New Delhi Subhash Bana Vs. ACIT, New Delhi Entire interest paid to bank for acquiring capital asset would be eligible as part of cost of acquisition. 208/2017 AY 2013-14 Jodhpur Gayatri Maheshwari vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Jodhpur The amount of interest paid by the assessee constitutes the actual cost to the assessee for that property. The interest amount should be definitely added to the actual cost of the property. 1120/2016 AY 2011-12 C Bench, Chennai ITO vs. Smt. R. Aishwarya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to pay interest of ₹ 16, 878.00 on the amount borrowed by her. The amount of ₹ 95,000.00 plus the interest paid by the assessed constitutes the actual cost to the assessed of the land. The fact that the amount of ₹ 95,000.00 was paid by the assessed to the vendor and the amount of interest of ₹ 16,878.00 was paid to a different person, namely, her mother-in-law, does not make any difference so far as the assessed is concerned in respect of the actual cost of the land to her. It will not also make any difference whether the interest was paid on the date of the purchase or whether it is paid subsequently. To exclude the interest amount from the actual cost of the assets would lead to anomalous results. Supposing she ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee had purchased house property, availing loan. The house property was subsequently sold and assessee included interest paid on housing loan while computing capital gains u/s 48. The Assessing Officer was of opinion that since interest in question on housing loan, had already been claimed as deduction u/s 24(b), the same could not be taken into consideration for computation u/s 48 and interest amount was added to income of assessee. The CIT(A) reversed the findings of A and held deduction u/s. 24(b) and computation of capital gains u/s 48 were altogether covered by different heads of income i.e., income from 'house property' and 'capital gains'. None of them excludes operative of the other. The interest in ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
