TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 485
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itrarily concluded that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is in accordance to law. 4. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in not considering the facts of the case and in enhancing Rs. 4826524/- from Rs. 200000/-out of transportation charges u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act 1961 whereas the provisions of the section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable in our case. 5. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming an adhoc disallowance of Rs. 20000/- out of vehicle in use expenses. 6. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming an addition of Rs. 14198/- being notional disallowance of interest on borrowed fund u/s 36(1)(iii) of the IT. Act. 7. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming an adhoc disallowance of Rs. 250000/- out of repair and maintenance expenses. 8. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in treating sale of agriculture land to be a non-agricultural land and confirming an addition of Rs. 1563000/- on this account. 9. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not properly looking into the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the ld. CIT(A) without serving notice of enhancement upon the assessee. On merit, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that since the assessee was making payment to drivers for transportation of material pursuant to the agreement, he was not required to deduct TDS. Therefore, no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is called for. 6. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has afforded sufficient opportunity to the assessee to justify the transportation charges by placing relevant evidence, but the assessee could not file the same and the ld. CIT(A) has accordingly made disallowance of Rs. 48.26 lakhs having invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Since the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to justify its claim, no notice of enhancement was required. 7. Having carefully examined the orders of the lower authorities in the light of the rival submissions, we find that undisputedly the Assessing Officer has made disallowance of Rs. 2 lakhks out of transportation charges on ad hoc basis having noted that the expenditures are not open for verification. But when the matter was travelled to the ld. CIT(A), the ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see has made investment of Rs. 1,41,980/- in shares of the sister concern, thereby equivalent interest @ 10% amounting to Rs. 14,198/- was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. 13. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with the submission that the interest was paid by the assessee out of surplus funds and not from the borrowed funds. The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance having noted that the assessee has not established that the investment of Rs. 1,41,980/- in shares was made out of surplus funds. 14. Now the assessee is before the Tribunal, but no evidence is filed to justify that this investment was made out of surplus funds. Since the assessee has made payment on borrowed funds, disallowance @ 10% on investment in sister concern was rightly made by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly we confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 15. Apropos ground No.7, it is noticed that the assessee has debited Rs. 60,25,774/- under the head "repair and maintenance and bills and vouchers for the same were self-made and unverifiable in nature. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has made disallowance of Rs. 2.50 lakhs. 16. Aggrieved, the assessee pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herefore, the land cannot be categorized as agricultural land. Accordingly, he calculated the long term capital gain at Rs. 15.63 lakhs. 21. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with the submission that the land is situated outside 8KM of the municipal limit. Therefore, no capital gain can be charged on this transaction, as the land is an agricultural land. The ld. CIT(A) was not convinced with the contention of the assessee and he accordingly confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 22. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and during the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has filed an affidavit of the assessee along with notification of the State Government defining the boundaries of Kanpur city. The ld. counsel for the assessee has further contended that as per notification, Village Bithoor, in which the land is situated, do not fall within the boundary of Kanpur, therefore, the land is outside the limit of 8 KM from the municipal limit of Kanpur. Thus, no capital gain can be computed on the transaction of the said agricultural land. 23. The ld. D.R. has submitted that in order to ascertain the location of the ....