https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752490 ITAT Hyderabad remanded the matter back to AO for re-examination of indexed cost of improvement claim in long-term capital gain computation. The assessee claimed construction costs based on work order for completing semi-finished residential flat, but AO rejected it due to lack of bank statements proving payment to vendor. ITAT found AO's rejection of work order as non-genuine was baseless, but assessee also failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual payment. AO directed to verify claim by calling bank records if necessary and allow deduction if payment proven. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 09 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 May 2024 16:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752490 ITAT Hyderabad remanded the matter back to AO for re-examination of indexed cost of improvement claim in long-term capital gain computation. The assessee claimed construction costs based on work order for completing semi-finished residential flat, but AO rejected it due to lack of bank statements proving payment to vendor. ITAT found AO's rejection of work order as non-genuine was baseless, but assessee also failed to provide sufficient evidence of actual payment. AO directed to verify claim by calling bank records if necessary and allow deduction if payment proven. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752490