IT : Where Assessing Officer disallowed interest on loan taken for repayment of an earlier loan taken for construction of building on ground that assesee failed to establish nexus between loan and building construction but assessee assured to establish same if opportunity was given, matter was to be remanded back
■■■
[2014] 51 taxmann.com 135 (Hyderabad - Trib.)
IN THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH 'A'
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad
v.
C. Venkateswara Rao*
P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IT APPEAL NOS. 944 & 985 (HYD.) OF 2013
[ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 & 2008-09]
AUGUST 28, 2014
I. Section 24 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income from house property - Deductions (Interest on loan) - Assessment year 2007-08 - In earlier years, assessee had mobilized fixed deposits and received loans for purpose of construction of hospital building - Assessee took loan from bank for repayment of said old loans - Interest paid on new bank loan was claimed as deduction under section 24(b) - In absence of any books of account maintained by assessee or any other evidence produced in support, Assessing Officer held that there was no direct nexus between value addition made to building and fixed deposits mobilized - Accordingly, he disallowed claim of assessee - Whether since assessee claimed that he was in a position to establish that said deposits were utilized for construction of hospital building, matter was to be restored back - Held, yes [Para 6] [Matter remanded]
II. Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained investment (Bank deposits) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessing Officer found cash deposits in bank account of assessee and treated same as unexplained investment and, accordingly, made addition of Rs. 15.60 lakh to income of assessee - Assessee pointed out that amount deposited in bank account was actually Rs. 1.56 lakh and not Rs. 15.60 lakh - Whether matter was to be remanded back - Held, yes [Para 12] [Matter remanded]
■■■
[2014] 51 taxmann.com 135 (Hyderabad - Trib.)
IN THE ITAT HYDERABAD BENCH 'A'
Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2(1), Hyderabad
v.
C. Venkateswara Rao*
P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IT APPEAL NOS. 944 & 985 (HYD.) OF 2013
[ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 & 2008-09]
AUGUST 28, 2014
I. Section 24 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income from house property - Deductions (Interest on loan) - Assessment year 2007-08 - In earlier years, assessee had mobilized fixed deposits and received loans for purpose of construction of hospital building - Assessee took loan from bank for repayment of said old loans - Interest paid on new bank loan was claimed as deduction under section 24(b) - In absence of any books of account maintained by assessee or any other evidence produced in support, Assessing Officer held that there was no direct nexus between value addition made to building and fixed deposits mobilized - Accordingly, he disallowed claim of assessee - Whether since assessee claimed that he was in a position to establish that said deposits were utilized for construction of hospital building, matter was to be restored back - Held, yes [Para 6] [Matter remanded]
II. Section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Unexplained investment (Bank deposits) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessing Officer found cash deposits in bank account of assessee and treated same as unexplained investment and, accordingly, made addition of Rs. 15.60 lakh to income of assessee - Assessee pointed out that amount deposited in bank account was actually Rs. 1.56 lakh and not Rs. 15.60 lakh - Whether matter was to be remanded back - Held, yes [Para 12] [Matter remanded]
No comments:
Post a Comment