TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1167
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rounds : S. No Grounds of Appeal 1. The order of the CIT(A) passed u/s. 250 of the Act dated 21-04- 2025 is erroneous both on facts and in law to the extent the order is prejudice to the interests of the appellant. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the grounds of appeal of assessee, without fairly considering the assessee's submissions, evidences like bills, vouchers and bank statements in support of the improvement made to the property and that upholding of disallowance of such claim. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the decision of the Assessing Officer to disallow the claim of cost of improvement with indexation of the amount Rs. 4,05,72,447/ - without considering the facts of the case. 4. The Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. General Ground 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed Return of Income declaring total income of Rs. 2,66,76,180/- on 31.10.2018. The case was selected for limited scrutiny assessment to verify the income from other sources, details of assets and liabilities and Capital Gains/income on sale of property. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold the property on 10.08.2017 to Sri K V K S Prasada Rao for a sale consideration of Rs. 13,90,00,000/- and the said property was purchased by the assessee for the value of Rs. 7,90,00,000/- on 28.07.2014. In the Return of Income for the Asst. Ye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ada Rao the same house consisting of ground plus two upper floors along with all doors, windows, fittings, electrical fittings, electrical service connections, security deposits with electricity department C GHMC for water and sewerage connections, etc. After considering the purchase deed and sale deed of the property, the Assessing Officer denied the cost of improvement of Rs. 3,88,87,592/- as claimed by the assessee. Therefore the explanation of the assessee was rejected by the Assessing Officer and made addition towards LTCG of Rs. 4,05,72,447/- towards indexed cost of improvement. 4. Aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee reiterated the submissions made before the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he fully furnished house through sale deed dated 10.08.2017 which is evident from the sale deed. The learned counsel for the assessee referred to the schedule of property as per purchase deed and submitted that, the assessee has purchased the house of ground plus two upper floors and the same has been fully furnished by incurring various expenditure by the assessee and all the bills / documents submitted to the Assessing Officer. The assessee has incurred Rs. 3,88,87,592/- for further construction and improvement of the house of which he has claimed indexation benefit and claimed deduction of Rs. 4,05,72,447/-. The Assessing Officer without appreciating the relevant facts, simply disallowed the claim of the assessee stating that purchased h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....low in the light of the submissions made. There is no dispute with regard to sale of property by the assessee for a consideration of Rs. 13,90,00,000/- vide sale deed dated 10.08.2017 and the cost of purchase of the impugned property was at Rs. 7,90,00,000/- as per the purchase deed dated 28.07.2014. The assessee has computed the LTCG of Rs. 62,42,220/- after claiming cost of improvement with indexation of Rs. 4,05,72,447/-. The assessee claims that he had purchase of semi constructed house consisting of ground plus two upper floors and sold the house property consisting of ground plus two upper floors which was fully furnished for which he has spent a sum of Rs. 3,88,87,592/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed cost of improvement with index....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s fully completed with all doors, windows, fittings, electrical fittings, electrical service connections, security deposits with electricity department C GHMC for water and sewerage connections, etc. The evidences filed by the assessee i.e. purchase deed of the property and sale deed clearly shows distinction between what was purchased by the assessee and what was sold by the assessee. Further, the assessee has also furnished ledger accounts of various contractors along with bills (including bills of VR Associates, Mohammed Abdul Masseh, Abdul Sattar Abdul Gani, Salaries payment, Aparna Enterprises Limited, Mohd. Abdul Habeen, Uday Heights Pvt. Ltd.), for expenditure incurred for Rs. 3,88,87,592/- for further construction of house property ....