ANITA RAMDAS KHUTWAD,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14(4), PUNE

आदेश / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM :

This appeal filed by the assessee is emanating out of the order of 1. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) - 7, Pune dated 21.05.2018 for the assessment year 2013-14.

Assessee is an individual who is stated to be having rental income and income from other sources. Assessee filed her return of income for A.Y 2013-04 on 19.04.2014 declaring total income of Rs.3,34,179/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was

ITA No.1421/PUN/2018

framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 21.03.2016 determining

the total income at Rs.20,40,800/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO,

assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dated

21.05.2018 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)-7/Wd.14(4)/10737/2016-17)

granted partial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of

Ld.CIT(A) assessee is now appeal before us and has raised the following

effective ground :

“On the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 7, Pune has erred in disallowing and adding back an amount of Rs.9,84,464/- on account of Interest on loan taken for construction of godown.”

assessee had received rent from letting off of godowns which was

treated as income from business. AO treated the income as being

“income from house property”. AO on perusing the balance sheet

noticed that assessee had taken loans of approx 2.11 crore and had

paid interest of Rs.19,68,928/- which was claimed as expenditure. He

also noticed that the balance sheet reflected godowns at Rs.50,22,451/-

and value of land purchased at Rs.50,44,790/-. AO noted that

assessee has not clarified about the reasons for interest payment. In

the absence of details AO considered 50% of the amount borrowed to

have been utilized for purchase of land and 50% for construction of

godown. He accordingly considered interest element of Rs.9,84,464/- to

be attributable to the house property and accordingly deducted it from

the computation of income from house property. Aggrieved by the order

of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who confirmed the

order for the reason that no details in support of the claim was

ITA No.1421/PUN/2018

submitted by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A),

assessee is now before us.

authorities and further submitted that AO was not justified in adding

back 50% of the interest amount. Ld DR on the other hand supported

the order of lower authorities.

record. The issue in the present appeal is with respect to disallowance

of 50% of interest. AO and Ld.CIT(A) while deciding the issue has noted

that no details about the utilization of borrowed funds were furnished

by the assessee before them. Before us also no details about the

purchase of land, date of its purchase, when the godown was

constructed, the amount spent on construction have been furnished. In

such a situation, we find no reason to interfere with the order of

Ld.CIT(A) and thus the grounds of assessee are dismissed.

Order pronounced on the 27th day of March, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 27th March, 2019. Yamini

ITA No.1421/PUN/2018

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. CIT(A)-7, Pune. 4. Pr. CIT-6, Pune. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक सद�य” / 5 DR, ITAT, “SMC” Pune; 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER // True Copy // व�र�ठ �नजी स�चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune.