RAMAN MAYAVAN,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO WARD 1, NAMAKKAL

The appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem in dated 21.02.2019 pertaining to assessment year 2012 - 2013.

The brief facts of the case is that the Assessee is an individual doing medical profession and running a hospital in the name of “Shanthi Hospital”. He had filed the return of income admitting an income of Rs.7,11,710/-. The Assessing Officer after following due procedures completed the assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee in the return of income has claimed that he had paid an amount of Rs.24,88,857/- towards interest payment to Sundaram BNP Paripasu. The Assessing Officer has asked the Assessee as to why the above payment is made and in response to that the Assessee has submitted that the Assessee is doing a medical profession and maintaining the books of accounts which was subjected to audit u/s.44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that the income from other sources was the income derived from the activities which are not regular and consistent for which no books of accounts are maintained.

The Assessing Officer after considering the same has disallowed the interest claim made by the Assessee.

On appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below.

The Assessee in his return of income has claimed an interest income of Rs.24,88,857/-. The Assessee has not filed any details in respect of the property purchased and the income derived from the property purchased and simply submitted that he is covered by Section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In our opinion, it is not sufficient when the Assessee had claimed huge interest amount as it is the duty of the Assessee to submit all the details in respect of the nature of the property and what is the income generated out of the property. The Assessee has failed to substantiate before the Assessing Officer. Thus, we set aside the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and remit back the issue to the Assessing Officer to pass an assessment order de novo in accordance with law. The appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in is allowed for statistical purpose.