2026 (1) TMI 185

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in not considering a sum of Rs. 13,00,425/- on account of interest on loan paid to India Bulls for purchase of property as deduction from cost of acquisition and that too by recording incorrect facts and finding and without observing the principles of natural justice. 2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in not considering a sum of Rs. 13,00,425/- on account of interest on loan paid to India Bulls for purchase of property as deduction from cost of acquisition is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 4.1 Regarding the disallowance of interest of Rs. 13,00,425/-, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the findings of the AO, ruling that the interest paid on a property loan is not allowable under Section 48 for the purpose of computing capital gains. The Ld. CIT(A) further directed that the assessee is not entitled to carry forward the resultant short-term capital loss to future years. 4.2 In respect of the addition of Rs. 1,40,877/-, the assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that a revised computation of income had been filed wherein this specific expenditure was no longer claimed. Taking note of this submission, the Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to verify the rev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T(A) on this issue is very clear and needs no interference. Therefore these grounds of appeal are dismissed. 8.1 Regarding ground no. 3 the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order has given a very clear finding in para 7.5 which read as under: 7.5. Further, the AO has correctly disallowed the said short term capital loss, hence, the appellant is not allowed to carry forward the said losses for the future year. Accordingly, this ground of appeal is dismissed. The ground no. 5 is related to addition of Rs. 1,40,877/- which was claimed as forming the part cost of acquisition. From the computation it is seen that the appellant has paid said amount for the delayed possession. In this regard the appellant has stated that he has submitted re....