DHANPAT RAJ KHATRI - HUF,JAISALMER vs. ITO,, JAISALMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainshri Dhanpat Raj Khatri Vs The Ito Khatri Pada, Jaisalmer Jaisalmer

237 ITR 570 held that if explanation is dissatisfactory even though the addition is not sustainable and that provision of Section 68 is discretionary and discretion must be used as per law and decided judgements and not according to the presumption. Since the assessee has submitted the entire details, books of accounts etc. and the AO did not reject

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

237 sq.ft and total area of building for which rent is received at 5317 sq. ft. Therefore, lower authorities have not allowed the claim of the interest. On going through the provision of section 24, there are no such restriction that the assessee will be denied the deduction of interest payable of capital borrowed on which the income is offered

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

237 sq.ft and total area of building for which rent is received at 5317 sq. ft. Therefore, lower authorities have not allowed the claim of the interest. On going through the provision of section 24, there are no such restriction that the assessee will be denied the deduction of interest payable of capital borrowed on which the income is offered