AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1634
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has also erred while confirming the additions as per the grounds following. 2. That the Learned Assessing Officer has erred both in fact and in law while disallowing claim of assessee of Rs. 16,27,671/- as per original return submitted (stated as Rs. 6,66,7661- in the assessment order) on account of interest capitalized and added to the cost of property sold, before indexing and arriving at the indexed cost of property while computing the Long Term Capital Gain and that indexation should have been applied to interest as well, and the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has also erred while confirming the additions. 3. The Learned Assessing Officer has erred both in fact and la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was further observed that assessee computed indexed cost of acquisition as under: Indexed cost of acquisition Total cost of construction Rs.1,04,54,355/- Indexed cost of construction Rs. 1,47,73,472/- Total interest paid Rs. 16,27,671/- 2.3. During the course of assessment proceedings assessee was asked to show cause as to why the interest included in the cost of acquisition may not be disallowed, as the same has been claimed as deduction under the head "income from house property". In response to the show cause notice, assessee replied vide submission dated 31/01/14 that it had erroneously included the interest paid on housing loan which was paid after the date of possession. The assessee having realised the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ork, electrical and plumbing work etc before the said property could be made livable. 2.5. Aggrieved by the additions made by Ld. AO assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT (A) who confirmed the addition so made. 2.6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT (A), assessee is in appeal before us now. 3. It has been submitted by Ld.AR that Ground No. 1 is general in nature and therefore does not call for any adjudication. 4. Ground No. 2 has been raised against disallowance confirmed by Ld. CIT (A) towards disallowance of interest for the year 2005-06 and 2006-07. Ld.AR submitted that the entire interest paid by assessee on loan taken for acquiring capital asset deserves to be allowed. 4.1. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee during th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Rs.) Amount (Rs.) 2005-06 257980 2006-07 ( up to date of possession) 306569 564549 2006-07 (after date of possession) 102217 2007-08 322733 2008-09 274209 2009-10 260067 2010-11 103896 1063122 Total: 1627671 5.1. Admittedly assessee has claimed the interest paid on loan taken for acquiring capital asset as expenses under section 24 (b) of the Act. 5.2. We have perused the records, analysed the facts and circumstances of the case and considered the judicial pronouncements, which was placed before us. In the case of CIT Vs. Mithilesh Kumari (supra), Hon'ble High Delhi Court held as under:- "(13) We are in respe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vations of the Calcutta and the Bombay High Courts to the present case, we hold that the Tribunal was right in adding the interest amount of Rs. 16,878.00 towards the actual cost of the land." 5.3. Further in the case of ACIT Vs C.Ramabrahmam, the ITAT Chennai Bench 'C' in ITA No. 943/Mds/2012 has held that the assessee had purchased house property, availing loan. The house property was subsequently sold and assessee included interest paid on housing loan while computing capital gains u/s 48. The Assessing Officer was of opinion that since interest in question on housing loan, had already been claimed as deduction u/s 24(b), the same could not be taken into consideration for computation u/s 48 and interest amount was added to income of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3 relates to disallowance confirmed by Ld. CIT (A) in respect of expenses incurred towards cost of improvement being woodwork, electrical and plumbing etc of the new flat amounting to Rs. 13,79,256/-. 6.1. Ld.AR submitted that the expenses were incurred by assessee to make the flat livable, the details of which are as under. Amount as per conveyance deed Rs. 1,84,89,360/- Stamp paper the above Rs. 12,94,300/- Other charges paid for purchase, including registration charges, legal charges, documentation charges, EDC, IDC etc. Rs.10,44,715/- Total payments to Raheja Developers Rs.2,08,28,375/- Cost of improvement i.e. wood work, electric and plumbing work etc. Rs.13,79,256/- TOTAL cost of property Rs.2,22....