Appeal dismissed for lack of evidence in tax matter. Concrete proof crucial for accurate tax assessment.

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal, upholding the decision to disallow the claimed cost of improvement for computing Long Term Capital Gains. The Tribunal found the affidavit provided by the assessee insufficient and lacking specific details, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence to support claims in tax matters. The judgment highlights the necessity of substantiating claims with verifiable documentation to ensure accurate determination of tax liabilities.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disallowance of cost of improvement claimed by the assessee for the purpose of determining taxable Long Term Capital Gains.

Detailed Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 12.07.2019 concerning the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2016-17. The assessee sold an immovable property during the relevant year and claimed the cost of improvement at Rs.1,80,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- for the years 1982 and 1983 respectively while computing Long Term Capital Gains. However, the Assessing Officer found that the claim towards cost of improvement lacked documentary evidence and was aimed at reducing tax liabilities. Consequently, the Assessing Officer denied the claimed cost of improvement for determining taxable Long Term Capital Gains.

The assessee appealed before the CIT(A) challenging the denial of the cost of improvement claim. The CIT(A) upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, stating that the appellant failed to provide documentary evidence to support the claimed cost of improvement. The appellant argued that the improvement was carried out by their brother with his own resources in 1982 and 1983, but only submitted an affidavit as evidence. The CIT(A) found the affidavit insufficient and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards Long Term Capital Gains.

Further aggrieved, the assessee appealed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that apart from the affidavit, the assessee did not possess any other supporting evidence for the claimed cost of improvement. The Tribunal found the affidavit vague and lacking in specific details regarding the nature and timing of the improvements. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing clear sources of knowledge or belief in an affidavit to establish credibility. As the affidavit provided by the assessee was considered insufficient and self-serving without corroborative evidence, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the CIT(A) to disallow the cost of improvement claimed by the assessee for computing Long Term Capital Gains.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing the necessity of providing concrete evidence to support claims, especially in tax matters where the burden of proof lies on the taxpayer. The judgment underscores the importance of substantiating claims with verifiable documentation to avoid disallowances and ensure accurate determination of tax liabilities.

---