RAVI BINDAL & MADAN LAL CHAUDHARY,PARWANOO vs. ITO, PARWANOO

आदेश/Order

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.04.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Shimla [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].

ITA No. 836-Chd-2018- Ravi Bindal & Madan Lal Chaudhar, Solan 2

disallowance of interest expenditure claimed by the assessee as

deduction against the rental income earned from House Property as per

provisions of section 24 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the

Act').

The assessee during the year earned a total rental income from

house property of Rs. 14.49 lacs. The assessee claimed a deduction of

Rs. 8,68,216/- on account of interest expenditure incurred for

acquisition and construction of house property as allowable under the

provisions of section 24 of the Act. A perusal of the impugned order of

the CIT(A) reveals that the Ld. CIT(A) has rejected the aforesaid claim

of the assessee on two grounds; firstly, that the assessee has not placed

the copy of the relevant loan agreement / bank papers to show that the

aforesaid loan was taken for acquisition / construction of the house

property in question; secondly, that even otherwise the total investment

in the building including lift as per the balance sheet was of Rs.

1,40,75,414/-, however, the assessee claimed the deduction of interest

expenditure on a total loan of Rs. 1.61 crores.

ITA No. 836-Chd-2018- Ravi Bindal & Madan Lal Chaudhar, Solan 3 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that he is ready to

produce the relevant evidence before the Assessing Officer to show that

the aforesaid loan was taken for acquisition / construction of the

building in question.

So far as the contention raised by the Ld. CIT(A) that as against

the total loan of Rs. 1.61 cores, the assessee has incurred expenditure of

Rs. 1.40 crores on the building, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has

submitted that the assessee has taken loan in two parts. In first part, a

loan of Rs. 70 lacs was taken which was fully utilized, however, out of

the second loan amount of Rs. 1 crore, the assessee utilized most of

the amount except some amount which was deposited in the shape of

FDR with the bank to be used as and when required. The Ld. Counsel for

the assessee has submitted that the assessee may be allowed to

demonstrate before the Assessing Officer as to exactly what amount of

loan was used for acquisition / construction of the building and that how

much of proportionate disallowance is attracted, considering the date of

the loan sanctioned and date of utilization of the same etc.

assessee and considering the same, I accordingly set aside the order of

the CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to

examine the limited aspects as noted above and to decide the matter

afresh on this issue in accordance with law.

ITA No. 836-Chd-2018- Ravi Bindal & Madan Lal Chaudhar, Solan 4 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the Open Court immediately on completion of hearing. Sd/-

(संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 06.06.2019 “आर.के.”

आदेशक���त�ल�पअ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकरआयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय��त�न�ध, आयकरअपील�यआ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड�फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar