TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1644
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed opinion that the reasons mentioned by the assessee constitute reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within prescribed time. In the circumstances, the delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- "1. The Sale consideration which is accepted by both Assessee and CIT (Appeal) includes consideration in respect of transfer of Land along with Building constructed on the same land (subjected capital asset) by assessee. The subjected building was constructed by assesses husband through local construction worker. CIT (Appeal) in their computation considered cost of land with indexation, but rejected cost of construction of building on the ground of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed cost of acquisition and recomputed the capital gain at Rs. 43,57,789/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act by determining the income at Rs. 58,82,355/-. 5. In first appeal, being unsatisfied with the contentions of the assessee, & also in the absence of accurate evidence Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 6. Being aggrieved with the decision of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. LD AR submitted before us that the assessee is a senior citizen & widow of late LT Colonel Suresh Dahiwelkar. Her son is also employed in Indian Army. She sold her residential property which was constructed by her late husband Suresh Dahiwelkar who was ex-military men. The Assessing Office....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Rs. 6,292/- towards principal was paid in one year & the total principal outstanding as on 31-03-1999 was Rs. 39,945/-. On the basis of this certificate it was submitted that the house loan was obtained in the year 1990-91. On the basis of another certificate dated 07-06-2024, issued by Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Officers) Golibar Maidan, PUNE, it was further demonstrated that during 1990-91 the amount of Rs. 1,08,051/- was also withdrawn by her late husband from DSOP Fund & Retirement benefits (26435 + 46,949+ 34661) & the same was invested in the house construction. Apart from these amounts regular income was also invested on construction of the residential house. Regarding renovation expenses it was submitted that from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... improvement of residential house done by the late husband of the assessee. During the course of hearing, it was submitted by the counsel of the assessee that the residential house was constructed by the late husband of the assessee in the year 1990-91 & the improvement in the house was also done by him in the year 2003-04 & due to the untimely death of her husband the assessee is not aware with the cost of construction or relevant documents. On being directed by the Bench to furnish any evidence to support her case, the assessee tried her level best to collect the relevant documents & furnished before us the copy of relevant HDFC housing loan certificate, the copy of certificate issued by Principal Controller of Defence Accounts regarding ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o apparent from the perusal of the bank accounts that substantial amount i.e. more than Rs. 4,82,500/- was withdrawn during F.Y. 2003-04 from the Maharashtra Bank Savings Account No.8147 of the late husband of the assessee for the purposes of renovation of the property. We find that withdrawal entries were there in the name of sutar, ply decor & construction company etc. Considering the totality of the facts of the case & in the interest of justice, being a special case of senior citizen lady being widow of Army personnel, we deem it appropriate to accept the contention of the assessee to certain extent. Therefore the cost of construction is estimated at Rs. 5,00,000/- in the F.Y. 1990-91 (which was claimed by the assessee at Rs. 5,13,670/-....