2025 (7) TMI 1575

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. The order of the learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, is wrong, illegal and is opposed to law. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20 erred in upholding the order of assessment which is based only on suspicion and surmise and not based on any material evidence. 3. The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that no incriminating material has been found/ discovered during the Search and Seizure operations and therefore the impugned disalloewance made by the assessing officer and sustained by the learned CIT(A) are bereft of jurisdiction and bad in law. 4. The learned CIT(A) ought to have seen that the impugned disallowance made by the Ld. A.O and sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) are bereft ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r section 139(5) and income declared under presumptive basis while filing returns under section 139(1) and under the head "other sources" as income of the appellant. 10. The learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance of expenses claimed by the appellant under section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act which was incurred for the purpose of earning income from other sources. For these and other grounds that may be rendered at the time of hearing it is most humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appellants appeal and thus render justice. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of wholesale and retail trade of cosmetics and perfumes u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....terest deduction claimed of Rs. 1,61,986/- u/s.57 of the Act, since the assessee has not filed any reply to show cause notice. 5. Aggrieved by the order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18 (ld.CIT(A)). Before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee submitted the details of party wise loan amounts borrowed. However, the assessee had not filed any fund flow statement or its utilisation for house property construction. Similarly, in respect of interest additions made and disallowance of the interest deduction claimed u/s.57 of the Act, the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence to prove the genuineness of expenditure. Therefore, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ucing the total income to Rs. 1,88,540/-. The assessee filed his return of income pursuant to notice u/s.153A of the Act by declaring an additional income of Rs. 12,50,000/- as agreed during the search proceedings. 10. However, the assessee has not furnished any evidence or supporting documents for claiming the interest on borrowed funds under the head income from house property and also towards interest expenses and income under the head income from other Sources. Therefore, the AO has made an addition on account of interest on borrowed capital for want of evidence along with interest income and expenses shown under the head income from other sources, which was confirmed by the ld.CIT(A). 11. We note that the ld.AR for the assessee h....