9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al gain at Rs. 4,17,235/- as against long term capital loss of Rs. 1,265/- computed by the assessee. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that agreement with contractor and his affidavit in respect of expenditure incurred on cost of improvement looks an afterthought story without any material & basis." 2. During the course of hearing, the ld AR submitted that the assessee filed his return of income on 09.07.2010 declaring total income of Rs. 2,05,580/-. Thereafter, the AO issued notice u/s 148 on 27.03.2017 for the reason that assessee has sold a plot for Rs. 9 lacs but the same is not declared in the return. In response to notice u/s 148, the assessee again filed the return declaring same income of Rs. 2,05,580/-. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The ld AR submitted that from the facts stated above, it can be noted that the only dispute in the present case is the allowability of expenditure of Rs. 4,18,500/- incurred on construction of basement on the said plot. The fact that at the time of sale, there was construction of 900 sq. ft. is evident from the sale deed and the site plan attached with the sale deed. At the time of purchase of this plot, there was no construction as is evident from the purchase agreement. Thus, the fact of construction at the time of sale is evident against which no contrary material is brought on record by the lower authorities. The issue therefore remains is what is the cost of construction. In support of the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is heard who has vehemently argued the matter and submitted that the documents submitted by the assessee in support of cost of improvement has rightly been rejected by the ld. AO and the ld CIT(A). It was submitted that the contract note signed by the contractor is not a legal document, there is no proof that the construction has been actually carried out and at which part of the plot since only a part of the plot has been sold, there is no proof of payment to the contractor and there is no valuation report which has been submitted in support of cost of construction/improvement. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee owns a plot of land measuring 200 sq yards and a part of the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubsequent affidavit of the contractor dated 23.10.2017 therefore doesn't inspire any confidence and cannot be accepted. Unless the assessee is able to demonstrate with verifiable evidence that there was actual construction on the property so sold, these agreement and affidavit cannot come to the aid of the assessee. The agreement is only an understanding between the two parties to carry out certain work and therefore, merely reflect an intention and understanding between the two parties and cannot therefore be relied to support the actual construction on the part of the plot of land so sold by the assessee. The subsequent affidavit talks about period starting 4.5.2009 and ending on 31.12.2009 during which the work was carried on and we find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
