TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 234
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... law it be held that the disallowances on account of DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES INCURRED in Land at Survey No.50/4/1/2/1/3a/3 at Chaurana Budruk amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/-, INDEXED TO Rs. 3,18,120/- and Rs. 1,00,000/- in Property at Survey No.83/2B/l at NALEGAON. Total Disallowances Rs. 4,18,120/- is unwarranted, unjustified & improper & contrary to the provisions of the law & facts prevailing in the case. The addition so made arbitrarily be deleted. The appellant be granted just & proper relief in this respect. 2. The Receptions had CONFIRMED to have received the Money for Vacating Encroachment, Development Work, Commission and other related works. They had confirmed on OATH before the Assessing Officer while recording their Statements" to have received the said amounts for their respective Deed/Works". They also had executed AFFIDAVITS confirming to have executed the respective works and received the amounts. Their Confirmations be considered and the expenses claimed may please be allowed fully. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not appreciated the Fact of the case and submissions filed before him during the course of hearing and passed the Order, rejecting....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owance of Rs. 7,50,000/- claimed on account of development and other expenses and aggregate addition of Rs. 7,84,033/-. The CIT(A) upheld the order of Assessing Officer in respect of addition of Rs. 7,84,033/- i.e. denied claim of exemption under section 54B of the Act. Further, the assessee had claimed development expenses which were disallowed by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) in this regard upholds the order of Assessing Officer observing as under:- "4.3.2 In view of the above, I am of the considered view that the appellant has claimed ingenuine deductions by making false claim of expenses on account of development and removal of encroachment with the intention to reduce the income from capital gain. The conclusion drawn by the A.O. after making investigations in this regard deserves to be upheld." 7. The assessee is in appeal against the order of CIT(A). 8. The learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the limited issue arising in the facts of Subhash Jagannath Kakade is the addition to the extent of Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 1 lakh in the properties sold by him, whereas in the facts of Smt. Vijaya Subhash Kakade, development expenses agitated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he payments were made as per receipts dated 27.12.2002 and 06.01.2003. The explanation of assessee in this regard was that the statement of Shri Karale was not correct as he was under pressure and he wrongly mentioned the work as 2009-10. The claim was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. Before the CIT(A), the assessee stressed that when the expenditure was actually made, it should be allowed. It was also pointed out that due to typographical error, the recipient wrongly stated the Chahurana Budruk instead of Nalegaon property and the same should be allowed as deduction from short term capital gains. The CIT(A) further noted that sum of Rs. 1 was claimed to have been paid to Shri Vishal Ashok Gaikwad against removal of encroachments, his statement was also recorded by the Assessing Officer and he admitted that his residential address was Pimplegaon and he was unable to furnish single proof of having his residence at Chahurana Budruk for the period 1999-2000. Another claim of assessee was regarding compound wall which work was claimed to be done by Shri Sanjay Jagnnath Kasar of Walki and the assessee claimed that sum of Rs. 1 lakh in this regard. The said person in his statement ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmovable properties situated at S.No.83/2B/2 and 105/1 jointly with two other persons for Rs. 1,05,90,000/-. The assessee received her share of Rs. 22,46,666/-, Government valuation of her share at Rs. 31,05,236/-. The total purchase cost of said property was shown at Rs. 9,40,093/- being 1/3rd of total purchase cost including stamp duty and registration charges. While computing the short term capital gains, the assessee claimed aggregate expenditure amounting to Rs. 7,50,000/- on account of development expenses in respect of said property. The Assessing Officer noticed certain discrepancies in the vouchers and the bank statements filed by the assessee which are summarized by the CIT(A) under para 4.2, which reads as under:- "4.2 During the scrutiny proceedings, on going through the vouchers and bank statements, the AO noticed following discrepancies: (i) The appellant claimed development expenses at Rs. 2,50,000/- in respect of the property situated at survey no.83/2B/2. In support of the same, she filed 3 vouchers amounting to Rs. 2,80,000/- as against claim of Rs. 2,50,000/-. And, in respect of another property situated at survey no.150/1 the expenses claimed @ Rs. 5,00,00....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the documents were found to be silent over the said fact. In view thereof, the CIT(A) held that the assessee had made false claim of expenses on account of development and removal of encroachments with the intention to reduce the income from short term capital gains. In view of the investigations carried out by the Assessing Officer, disallowance of Rs. 7,50,000/- was upheld. 14. The case of assessee before the Tribunal is that where the parties had confirmed the receipt of payment, then there was no justification for making the addition. Similar plea was raised in the case of husband of assessee and the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee pointed out that the issue arising in the case of wife was identical to the facts in Subhash Jagannath Kakade. However, I find that the facts are slightly at variance. The assessee has claimed that the income declared by her was under the head 'Income from short term capital gains', wherein certain payments were made in cash. The total expenditure of assessee on account of purchase of new property, development expenses and investment for making the deduction under section 80C of the Act was to the extent of Rs. 16,05,650/-, ou....