9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct b) Not adjudicating the ground relating to disallowance of interest expenditure 3. We heard the parties and perused the records. The assessee filed her return of income for the year under consideration declaring a total income of Rs. 20,61,910/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 54F of the Act and also interest expenditure claimed against the income from other sources. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld.CIT(A) who allowed the deduction u/s 54F of the Act. Even though the assessee had contested the disallowance of interest expenditure before the ld.CIT(A), yet he did not render his decision on the above said issue. The Revenue has filed this appeal before us o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. 7. Before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee contended that she owns only one residential flat in Golden Orchid. In respect of 50% share in the Madiwals building, the assessee submitted that the said building belongs to and owned by her husband. It was submitted that name of the assessee was included as second person only to ensure easy succession of the property to her, which is common practice adopted by everyone. In support of the claim, the assessee furnished copies of wealth tax returns filed by her husband in order to show that her husband has declared the residential property located in Madiwala as his residential house. The ld.CIT(A) was convinced with the explanations of the assessee and held that the residential building located i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO in order to elicit his opinion with regard to the claim of the assessee. Under the set of facts, we are of the view that this issue requires to be remitted to the file of AO for examining it afresh by duly considering the claim of the assessee with regards to the ownership of the residential building located at Madiwala. We earlier noticed that the assessee had claimed deduction u/s 54 of the Act and it is the AO who has stated that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the Act and the said view of the AO has been accepted by the assessee. We also notice that the manner of computation of deduction u/s 54 and 54F are different. However, there was no occasion for the AO to compute the eligible amount of deduction, since he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
