Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, 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.
The relevant facts as culled out from the material on record are as under :-
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.”
During the course of assessment proceedings AO noticed that
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.
Before us, Ld AR reiterated the submissions made before lower
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.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on
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.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is 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.