TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 21
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../Ahd/2011 for A.Y. 2006-07, Revenue has filed the appeal on the following grounds: "1) Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in directing the A.O.to pass a speaking order while giving effect to CIT(A)'s order after verifying the part details furnished by the assessee during assessment proceeding and by calling for further details from the assessee. 2) On facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have decided the issue on the basis of details filed by the assessee before him and ought not to have directed the A.O.to reconsider his own decision. 3) On facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have upheld the action of A.O.in disallowing the expenses from work-in-progress, as the assessee has not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s that the observations made by the assessing officer in various paras of the assessment order including in para 3.1 regarding part expenditure not recorded in books and para 3.5 etc. are grossly incorrect, contrary to the facts. The observation regarding part of investment not recorded in books and genuineness of the expenses and the business nexus had been made by the assessing officer without any material and evidence. 3.2 The assessee without prejudice to above further submits that the disallowances made by the assessing officer are incomprehensible and the said disallowances are contrary to the facts and law. The assessee submits that each and every disallowance made by the assessing officer be quashed. The assessee submits that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was asked to prove the genuineness of expenses claimed and was also asked to furnish supporting evidences regarding expenses incurred for project. Assessing Officer observe that assessee had appeared at the fag end i.e. on 26.02.2008 and filed details for the first time. However, as the corroborative evidence of incurring these expenses and business nexus has not been established, therefore, Assessing Officer disallowed the following expenses from work in progress account:- Sr.No. A.Y. Disallowances 1. 2006-07 Rs.8,52,34,051/- 2. 2007-08 Rs.7,74,27,638/- For both the Assessment Years involved, Assessing Officer has computed total income at Rs.Nil. However, Assessing Officer has carried out disallowanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... vouched and accounted. In other words, it is a contention of the appellant that business of the SPV had already commenced. 7. Considering the facts in totality, I am of the opinion that it is not just and proper to deny the benefits of the expenses incurred by the appellant in the construction of multi storied mall. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed that while giving effect to the instant appellate order, verify the expenses incurred and claimed by the appellant in A.Y. 2006-07 and A.Y.2007-08 as per the details submitted by the appellant on 26.12.2008. The Assessing Officer is further directed to verify the business nexus of such expenses. For this purpose, the Assessing Officer is free to call for any further details from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to deny the benefit of expenses incurred by assessee in the construction of multi storied mall. He further directed the Assessing Officer that while giving effect to the instant appellate order, verify the expenses incurred and claimed by assessee in A.Y. 2006-07 and A.Y.2007-08 as per details submitted by assessee on 26.12.2008 and Assessing Officer was further directed to verify business nexus of such expenses. For this purpose, Assessing Officer was free to call further details from assessee. Accordingly, Assessing Officer was directed to pass a speaking order about the genuineness of expenses incurred and business nexus thereof. According to us, having decided the main issue in favour of assessee by observing that it was not just and p....