TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 709
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the proceeding u/s 147/148. 2. That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) is grossly erred in not allowing the benefit of cost of improvement and brokerage paid while calculating the short term capital gain. 3. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 220000/- u/s 68." 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual against whom the proceedings U/s 147 were initiated by issuance of notice U/s 148 dated 18.03.2016 pursuant to which the assessee filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 1,97,810/-. Thereafter the assessment was completed U/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act wherein the income was assessed at Rs. 13,33,000/- whereby the Assessing Officer has brought to tax lon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as satisfaction of the Assessing officer. In support, reliance was placed on the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in case of CIT vs. Shree Rajasthan Syntex Ltd. 313 ITR 231. Further drawing our reference to reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, it was submitted that the AO has recorded the reasons stating that the assessee has sold the property for total consideration of Rs. 6,70,360/- which has been valued at Rs. 905000 for purposes of charging of stamp duty. It was further submitted that this is factually not correct for the reasons that the sale consideration of property is Rs. 9,05,000/- which was valued at Rs. 6,70,360/- by the stamp authorities. It was therefore, submitted that only basis for issuance of notice U/s 148 of the Act w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble property and has not disclosed the same to the tax authorities as the assessee has not filed his return of income. It was accordingly submitted that it is therefore, clearly a case of escapement of income and therefore, the notice U/s 148 of the Act has been rightly issued by the Assessing Officer after seeking approval from the higher authorities. Regarding the contention of the ld. AR that the AO has recorded wrong facts while recording the reasons, it was submitted that it was merely inter-change of sale consideration and value taken for the purposes of stamp duty however, the facts of the matter is that there is clearly transfer of an immovable property which has not been reported to tax therefore, merely because there is change of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... information in possession of the AO which shows that capital gains has escaped assessment, where the approval has been accorded by the higher authorities, we donot see any infirmity therein. In the result, ground of appeal is dismissed. 6. In Ground No. 2, the assessee has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(A) in not allowing the deduction of expense incurred by the assessee on account of cost of improvement of the house property and the transfer expenses. 7. In this regard, it was submitted by the ld AR that the assessee has incurred Rs. 65000/- on account of colour paint, flooring and other repair works after purchase of this property under consideration. The expenses so incurred is very petty amount and this much amount can b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt of the cost of the improvement, therefore, in the absence of the same the AO has rightly disallowed the said claim of the assessee. Similarly, regarding the commission expenses, no details have been submitted by the assessee and in absence of the same, claim has been rightly denied by the AO. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and pursued the material available on record. It is a case where the assessee has purchased the property on 29.04.2008 and has sold the same in less than a month on 19.05.2008, therefore, the contention of the ld AR that the property was to be used for residential purposes and hence, the assessee has incurred certain expenditure before moving into the said house doesn't inspire any confidence in our mind. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounts so maintained by the assessee, therefore the addition u/s 68 cannot be made. Hence the addition of Rs. 390000/-made u/s 68 as well as the act of Ld CIT(A) about sustaining of the addition of Rs. 220000/- are not in accordance with law therefore liable to declared as illegal and against the law. It was further submitted that the bank account cannot be treated as the regular books of accounts of any assessee. 13. It was further submitted that the assessee had submitted the affidavits of all the persons from whom the amount was taken and in the affidavits, all the persons have accepted the fact that they have given respective amounts as mentioned in the affidavits to the assessee. By submission of the affidavits, the assessee has disc....