TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 685
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that any provision for deduction / relief / incentive has to be construed liberally. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to quash the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) without any cogent reason. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee was employed with HFCL Infotel Limited, Mohali from 1.4.2007 to 1.1.2008 and with Verizone India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi for the remaining period relevant to assessment year under consideration i.e. upto 31.3.2008. For the assessment year 2008-09, the assessee submitted her return of income on 31.7.2008 declaring total income of Rs. 7,44,834/- which was subsequently revised on 18.1.2009 at a total income of Rs. 3,08,663/- as in the original return of income, the deduction u/s 24(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was not claimed. The case was selected for scrutiny as per guidelines of the CBDT. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 143(2) of the Act on 13.9.2009. Thereafter questionnaire alongwith notice u/s 143(2) / 142(2) was issued to the assessee. On perusal of the documents, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction on interest payment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the purchasers. Now I or my heirs cease to have any concern whatsoever regarding the said Plot and neither shall have any concern with the same in future. All the rights have been accrued to the purchasers, who may do whatever they likes and I will have no objection to the same. The whole of the expenses of the sale deed have been incurred by the purchasers. Permission to sell the Plot has been received from the Estate Officer, PUDA, Mohali vide Letter No. 27346, dated 16.12.2003, and this document is attached with the office copy of the sale deed. The purchasers shall have to abide by the terms of the Estate Officer, PUDA, Mohali. I and my other property shall be responsible in all situations for any legal defect. Therefore the sale deed of the Plot has been executed so that proof may remains. The contents have been read over and after hearing and considering, the same have been treated to be true and correct." 5. The Assessing Officer noticed that plot was purchased and owned by four persons and the housing loan had also been taken by the same four persons from the bank. The entire amount of loan obtained from the bank amounting to Rs. 19 lakhs was paid to Shri Darbara Sing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sons, and such consideration is paid out of a fund belonging to them in common, they are, in the absence of contract to the contrary, respectively entitled to interest in such property identical, as nearly as may be, with the interests to which they were respectively entitled in the fund; and, where such consideration is paid out of separate funds belonging to them respectively, entitled to interest in such property in proportion to the shares of the consideration which they respectively advanced. In the absence of evidence as to the interests in the fund to which they were respectively entitled, or as to the shares which they respectively advanced, such persons shall be presumed to be equally interested in the property." 2.3.1 Thus, if consideration is paid out of a common fund, belonging to a number of persons, they are entitled to interest in the property identical to the interest to which they were respectively entitled in the fund. The appellant has claimed that she has invested for purchase/construction of the impugned house property, but no evidence in this regard has been produced. Further, the house loan has been taken jointly by the all the four co-owners in whose names....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jit Singh Ld. DR, On the other hand heavily relied on the order of the authorities below in support of Revenue's contention. 9. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and have also perused the materials available on record. There is no doubt that so far as the facts of the present case are concerned, the assessee had claimed deduction on interest of housing loan of Rs. 6,86,971/- u/s 24(b)of the Act. There is no dispute that plot in question was purchased by four persons and the housing loan was also taken by same four persons. It is true that in the sale deed the share of individual is not specified. The language of section 45 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is abundantly clear and provides that where immovable property is transferred for a consideration to two or more persons, such consideration is paid out of funds belonging to them in common, they are entitled to interest in such property identical as nearly as may be with the interest to which they were respectively entitled in the fund. If such consideration is paid out of the separate funds belonging to them respectively, then such persons will be entitled to interest in such property in proportion to the s....