2021 (11) TMI 566

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Act' for short] to the extent of Rs. 14.10 lakhs. 2. The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The assessee is an employee of Motorola India Pvt. Ltd. During the year under consideration, the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 17,29,811/-, which included income of Rs. 20.93 lakhs declared under the head "Income from salary". During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. noticed that the assessee has constructed a residential property. From the valuation report submitted by the assessee, he noticed that the value of property was determined at Rs. 68.10 lakhs including the value of land. The assessee had availed loan of Rs. 30 lakhs. According to the A.O., the assessee did not furnish any ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has filed this appeal challenging the above decision rendered by the Ld. CIT(A). 6. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has carried out construction of the property during the years relevant to the assessment years 2006-07 & 2007-08. She submitted that the A.O. reopened the assessment of assessment year 2006-07 and made an addition of Rs. 5.66 lakhs towards difference in cost of construction disbelieving the claim of the assessee that a sum of Rs. 10.25 lakhs was used by the assessee for construction of the property out of his own savings during the year relevant to the assessment year 2006-07. The A.O. also estimated the cost of construction on the basis of market value at Rs. 60 lakhs. Since the assessee had disclosed Rs. 44.10 l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e extent of Rs. 14.10 lakhs without giving set off of Rs. 10.25 lakhs, which has already been deleted by him in assessment year 2006-07. Accordingly, she submitted that the claim of the assessee that the sum of Rs. 3.85 lakhs was made out of salary savings during the year under consideration during the year under consideration should be accepted. Accordingly she prayed for deletion of the entire addition of Rs. 14.10 lakhs. 10. We heard Ld. D.R. who supported the order passed by the tax authorities. 11. Having heard the rival submissions, we are of the view that there is merit in the submissions made by Ld. A.R. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the cost of construction of the house is Rs. 44.10 lakhs. The assessee has ....