Smt. Renu Verma, Delhi v. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3522/DEL/2015 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2017 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 352220114 RSA 2015
Assessee PAN AAGPV3870P
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 3522/DEL/2015
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant Smt. Renu Verma, Delhi
Respondent ACIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 29-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 15-06-2017
Next Hearing Date 15-06-2017
First Hearing Date 15-06-2017
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 02-06-2015
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI SMC BENCH NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3 522 /DEL/201 5 [A.Y. 20 1 0 - 11 ] SMT. RENU VERMA VS. THE A.C. I.T. 258 TAGORE PARK CIRCLE - 19 ( 1 ) DELHI N EW DELHI PAN : A AGPV 3870 P [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 27 . 1 1 .2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 . 1 1 .2017 ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B.L. GUPTA I.T. P REVENUE BY : SHRI ATIQ AHMED SR. DR ORDER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES F ROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 1 2 NEW DELHI VIDE ORDER DATED 1 8 .0 3 .201 5 FOR A.Y. 20 10 - 11 . 2 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED MAINLY ONE GROUND WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREINBELOW: IT IS CONTENDED THAT DETERMINATION AND INCLUSION OF INCOME OF RS. 6 57 136/ - AS DISALLOWANCE OF CONSTRUCTION COST IS WRONG PERVERSE NOT BASED ON EVIDENCES OPPOSED TO EVIDENCES ON RECORDS BASED ON SURMISES AND C ONJECTURES. 3. THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 6 57 136/ - AS DISALLOWANCE OF COST OF CONSTRUCTION WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 2 ITA NO. 3522 /DEL/201 5 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS PURCHASED A PLOT WHICH WAS A MATTER OF FACT AS IS EVIDENT ON RECORD WHICH W AS PLACED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. AS PER PAPER BOOK PAGE 8 WHICH IS SITE PLANT OF THE PLOT WHICH DEPICTS THAT IT IS A PLOT WHICH HAS BEEN PURCHASED AND NOT A BUILDING. SI MILARLY PAGE 10 OF THE PAPER BOOK SPEAKS OF PLOT NO. 5 AND NOT BUILDING AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE SAID CONSTRUCTION WITH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND EXPLANATION BY THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO NOT BEEN REJECTED AND UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES OF THE CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING ADDITION AND ACCORDINGLY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT(A) IS REVERSED. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 5 . IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE IN ITA NO. 3 522 /DEL/201 5 IS ALLOWED . THE ORDER IS PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 . 1 1 .2017. SD/ - [B.P. JAIN] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 29 TH NOVEMBER 2017 VL/ 3 ITA NO. 3522 /DEL/201 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI