TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (4) TMI 248
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s many as ten grounds, out of which grounds No.1 and 10 are general. Ground No.2 pertaining to sale consideration of property at Rs. 1,crore was withdrawn by the assessee in the course of hearing, as the assessee himself has admitted sale consideration at Rs. 1 crore in the revised return, which fact was also noted by the CIT(A), when similar ground was raised before her. Accordingly this ground is treated as withdrawn. 3. Facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are stated in brief. Assessee has filed return of income admitting capital gains, in which originally assessee took the sale consideration at Rs. 85 lakhs and claimed Rs. 1,70,000 as brokerage and Rs. 5,20,000 towards cost of improvement. Assessee admitted long term capit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pts in support of the claim of brokerage at Rs. 2 lakhs and cost of improvement of property at Rs. 5,20,000. He filled certain documents in support of the claim by way of quotations from some Maistries and entries in a note book as additional evidence. With reference to the agricultural income, assessee filed certain receipts addressed to the assessee by his accountant, dispatching money on sale of certain agricultural produce. This additional evidence was not considered by the CIT(A), as assessee has neither explained why they were not filed before the Assessing Officer, nor made any prayer for admission thereof before the CIT(A). Even though the same were noted by the CIT(A) in her order, the learned CIT(A) declined to admit the additiona....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....henticated documents, so as to consider them in the course of appellate proceedings. 8. As seen from the original claim also, the assessee has claimed only Rs. 1,70,00 as brokerage, which amount was increased to Rs. 2 lakhs. Had these receipts been genuinely paid and received at that point of time, the assessee would not have made any claim at incorrect amount of Rs. 1,70,000. Therefore, the authenticity of the receipt itself is doubtful. As already stated, no corroborative evidence is furnished, nor the receipt has any revenue stamp on it. Identity of the recipient is also not established. In view of this, we are not inclined to consider the assessee's claim of the payment for brokerage. 9. Coming the claim of improvements and develo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer asked for evidence, nothing was placed on record, indicating that this could be an afterthought, once the assessee came to know that he has to offer higher capital gains because the assessee has taken sale consideration at a lesser amount in the original return. Even though there are certain claims made in the original computation itself, since they are not supported by any evidence, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed the same. When these were pointed out to the learned counsel, in the course of arguments, he has submitted that the Assessing Officer could have disallowed some amount and allowed the balance. This itself indicates that there is no genuineness in the claim. Therefore, we are not incline....