9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to produce evidence of purchase of property to the extent of Rs.18,79,659/- as all the documents were produced before the Assessing officer as well. However before the Learned Commissioner appeals we were able to submit Proofs of Rs.43,68,919/- in spite of that additional of Rs.18,79,659/- was upheld by commissioner (appeals). 2. That addition of Rs.20,51,232/- on account of sale of nangloi property is totally incorrect and uncalled for as said property in raw condition was purchased for Rs.43,200 / - and for construction it costed Assessee Rs.10,06,800 / -. It is submitted that it is an old property acquired in A.Y 2003-04 nothing adverse was found with respect to the said property when our Assessment was framed m A.Y 2010-11 u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de for the purchase of property is furnished by the assessee before the AO. Therefore AO has taken the purchase price at Rs.27,25,290/- and short term capital gain calculated at Rs.99,74,841/- in place of Rs.80,95,182/- shown by the assessee and added difference of Rs.18,79,659/- in the taxable income of the assessee. 4. Upon assessee's appeal, ld. CIT (A) considered the assessee's submissions and held as under :- " I have considered the facts of the case, finding of the AO and submissions of the appellant. Appellant has furnished proof of payment of purchase of flat at Rs.27,25,290/- only whereas he has shown the cost of purchase at RS.46,04,949/-. The appellant has submitted during the appellate proceedings that he is enclosing the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held as under :- " I have considered the facts of the case, finding of the AO and submissions of the appellant. Appellant has claimed cost of improvement at Rs.10,50,000/- but no evidence is furnished in support of his contention. In absence of any evidence contention of the appellant in respect of cost of improvement could not be accepted and AO has correctly computed the long term capital gain on the basis of the cost of purchase and addition made by the AO at Rs.20,51,232/- is hereby confirmed." 7. Apropos issue of addition of Rs.28,24,895/- made by the AO in respect of the property, A-3/19, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi : On this issue, AO noted that as per the AIR information appellant has sold a property A-3/19, Paschim Vihar, New Del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpenses of Rs.2,82,26,167/- and no detail regarding expenses of Rs.14,98,184/- was submitted by the assessee before the AO. Therefore in absence of any detail and evidences, AO has disallowed expenses of Rs.14,98,184/- and added it back to. the taxable income of the assessee. 10. Upon assessee's appeal, ld. CIT (A) confirmed the addition by noting that it is an admitted fact that assessee was unable to produce any evidence in respect of expenses of Rs.14,98,184/-. Hence, ld. CIT (A) confirmed the addition. 11. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard the ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the records. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite several notices and the latest notice has also returned unserved. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
