DIPTI BHARGAVA, Kota v. ITO, Kota

ITA 955/JPR/2016 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2017 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 95523114 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN ADIPB9426C
Bench Jaipur
Appeal Number ITA 955/JPR/2016
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant DIPTI BHARGAVA, Kota
Respondent ITO, Kota
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 28-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 13-07-2017
Next Hearing Date 13-07-2017
First Hearing Date 13-07-2017
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 04-11-2016
Judgment Text
VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC) JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 955/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 DIPTI BHARGAVA 1-K-58 M. NAGAR EXT. KOTA. CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1) KOTA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ADIPB 9426 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MUZZAFAR IQBAL (ADV.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 21/11/2017 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28/11/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FR OM THE ORDER DATED 08/08/2016 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) KOTA FO R THE A.Y. 2010-11. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A TEACHER AND POSTED IN GOVT. HR. SEC. SCHOOL TIRTH DISTRICT- BUNDI. RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 29/07/2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3 93 430/-. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAS MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS UNDER THE VARIOUS HEADS AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS FINALIZED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) ITA 955/JP/2016_ DIPTI BHARGAVA VS ITO 2 AT A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 10 94 310/-. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN PART RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT BY T AKING FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES GROSSLY ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE INTERE ST DEDUCTIBLE U/S 24(B) TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 1 55 166/- AS AGAINST OF RS. 3 22 036/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE THE LD. CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION U/S 69A OF RS. 1 00 000/- DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSE E APPELLANT. 4. IN THE GROUND NO. 1 OF THE APPEAL THE ISSUE INV OLVED IS RESTRICTING THE INTEREST DEDUCTIBLE U/S 24(B) TO TH E EXTENT OF RS. 1 55 166/- AS AGAINST OF RS. 3 22 036/-. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DEALT THIS ISSUE IN HIS ORDER BY HOLDING AS UNDER: HOWEVER SINCE IT IS NOTICED THAT AS PER THE DETAIL S FILED IN THE PROCEEDINGS THE A.O. HAS FOUND THAT OUT OF THE TOT AL CLAIM OF LOAN RELATED INTEREST PAYMENT IN RESPECT OF PROPERT Y AT 124 RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR THE SECOND LOAN WAS A TERM LOAN AND ACCORDINGLY ITS INTEREST WOULD NOT BE ALLOWABLE AS IT HAD COMMERCIAL ASPECT INVOLVED AND THE APPELLANT COULD NOT ESTABLISH THAT IT WAS FOR MAINTENANCE OR UPKEEP OF THE PROPERT Y AT 124 RAJIV GANDHI NAGAR. THE PORTION OF THE INTEREST EXCLUDED BY THE A.O. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE DEDUCTION U/S 24(B) IS CONFIRMED. THE CLAIM IS RESTRICTED TO RS. 1 55 166/- ONLY. ITA 955/JP/2016_ DIPTI BHARGAVA VS ITO 3 5. WHILE PLEADING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THE LD AR HAS REITERATED THE ARGUMENTS AS MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) AND PRAYED TO ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. ON THE CONTRARY THE LD DR HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. I HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES ON THIS ISSUE. THE LOAN WA S TAKEN FOR FURNISHING EQUIPMENTS FIXTURE COLORS FANS A.CS DIESEL GENERATORS. THESE ITEMS WERE PART AND PARCEL OF ROOMS LET OUT TO EARN THE RENTAL INCOME. ALL THESE EQUIPMENTS WERE USED TO EARN THE R ENTAL INCOME. THESE EQUIPMENTS WERE PART OF WHOLE FROM WHICH ASSESSEE DERIVED RENTAL INCOME. THESE FURNITURE FIXTURES AND OTHER EQ UIPMENTS ARE NECESSARY REQUIREMENT FOR LETTING OUT THE ROOM. REV ENUES CLAIM THAT THIS LOAN WAS HAVING COMMERCIAL ASPECT AND INTEREST IS NOT ALLOWABLE BUT NOTHING IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECO RD. SIMPLY MENTIONING COMMERCIAL ASPECT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO D ISALLOW THE INTEREST. 7. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE SECOND GROUND OF THE AP PEAL IS CONFIRMING THE ADDITION U/S 69A OF RS. 1 00 000/- D EPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRME D THIS ADDITION BY HOLDING AS UNDER: AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 3 IN VIEW OF THE FINDING GIV EN BY THE A.O. AND THE NON SPECIFIC REPLIES OF THE A.O. IN TH E APPELLATE ITA 955/JP/2016_ DIPTI BHARGAVA VS ITO 4 PROCEEDINGS WHICH ARE CONTRADICTORY TO THE CLAIM MAD E DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH THE A.O. CONTROVERTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ITSELF I AM O F THE OPINION THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 1 00 000/- HAS BEE N RIGHTLY MADE AND IS LIABLE TO BE UPHELD. 8. WHILE PLEADING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THE LD AR HAS REITERATED THE ARGUMENTS AS MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) AND PRAYED TO ALLOW THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. ON THE CONTRARY THE LD DR HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 9. I HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES ON THIS ISSUE. THE ASSES SEE HAS STATED THAT THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK IS OUT OF INC OME OF HOSTEL OF RS. 19 34 232/-. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HA S STATED THAT THIS AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED OUT OF THE CAUTION MONEY RECEIV ED FROM THE STUDENTS. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ACCEPTED FOR THE REASON THAT THE ADMISSIONS IN THE HOSTEL WAS MADE IN THE MO NTH OF JUNE-JULY 2009. FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE IT IS NOTICED THA T THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING TWO HOSTELS ONE AT 124 RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR KOTA AND OTHER IN THE SHARE WITH SMT. UMAKANT BHARGAVA AND MRS. ART I BHARGAVA AT 162 RAJEEV GANDHI NAGAR KOTA. CONSIDERING THIS AS PECT I AM OF THE VIEW THAT SOME MORE FACTS ARE REQUIRED ON RECORD TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ITA 955/JP/2016_ DIPTI BHARGAVA VS ITO 5 RIGHT PERSPECTIVE THEREFORE THIS ISSUE IS RESTORE D BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 10. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28/11/2017. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 28 TH NOVEMBER 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SMT. DIPTI BHARGAVA KOTA. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO WARD-1(1) KOTA. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR ITAT JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 955/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR