9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the sake of convenience. However, in order to adjudicate the issue, reference is made to the facts and the issue raised in ITA No.267/Del/2015 relating to Assessment Year 2006-07. 3. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. "Re: Non-Admittance of Appeal by Ld. CIT(A)-XXXI a. As the Department, during the search, had seized jewellery of an amount much higher than the tax and interest liabilities, the assessee had made several requests since admittance of her tax liability to the department to sell the gold seized during the search and appropriate the proceeds towards the required tax demand. The Department has not taken any action in this regard. b. Refusing to admit the appeal on the ground that the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of natural justice and bad in law." 4. During the course of hearing, Revised Memo of appeal was filed in the name of legal heir, which is taken on record. 5. The first issue raised in the present appeal is against the non-admittance of the appeal by the CIT(A) on the ground that tax liability arising on account of returned income has not been paid by the assessee. 6. The second issue raised on merits is against the disallowance made on account of bank charges as expenses while calculating the interest income for the respective years. 7. The Ld.AR for the assessee pointed out that the assessee had demised on 25.09.2008 and the younger son of the assessee was brought on record as legal heir of deceased assessee. It was further explained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee, but no such exercise was carried out by the Department. Thereafter, the assessee claims that she sold house property and paid the taxes due with interest on returned income before her death during 18.03.2015 to 12.08.2015. The details of payments are as under:- Asst.Year Rs. Paid on Bank BSR Code Challan No. 2006-07 1248624 18.03.2015 Union Bank of India, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi 0291063 0001 2007-08 1335740 01.05.2015 0001 2008-09 1493210 20.07.2015 0002 2009-10 1085330 12.08.2015 0001 10. In such peculiar facts and circumstances especially where the assessee had demised, it is deemed fit to admit the appeals of the assessee and decide the issue on merits. We do not fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure should not be in the nature of a capital expenditure. (iii) The amount in question should not be in the nature of personal expenses of the assessee. (iv) The expenditure should be incurred in the accounting year. (v) There must be a clear nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income sought to be earned." 13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Seth R.Dalmia vs CIT [1977] 110 ITR 644 (SC) was held that "for allowability of such deduction, the dominant purpose of the expenditure incurred must be to earn income. The connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct; even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income." The claim of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
