Income Tax Appellate Tribunal: Appeal Dismissed on Capital Gains and Expenses Disallowance
Case Details
Case Number: ITA 5163/DEL/2019
Appellant: Jaideep Chopra, New Delhi
Respondent: ACIT Circle-41(1), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2014-15
Result: Appeal Dismissed
Case Filed On: 2019-06-04
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2022-12-19
Pronounced On: 2022-12-19
Order Summary
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Delhi Bench ‘H’ delivered its judgment on the appeal filed by Jaideep Chopra against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, New Delhi, dated 22nd March 2019, for the assessment year 2014-15. The case was heard by Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member, and Shri Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member.
Background
Jaideep Chopra filed an appeal challenging several additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and upheld by the CIT (A). The main issues contested were related to capital gains on property sales and the disallowance of production expenses.
Key Issues Raised
Issue 1: Addition of Rs.18,79,659 on account of the sale of a flat at Ireo Skyon. The AO contended that the appellant failed to provide evidence of purchase to the extent of Rs.18,79,659. The CIT (A) upheld this addition.
Issue 2: Addition of Rs.20,51,232 on account of the sale of Nangloi property. The AO restricted the cost price for indexation to Rs.40,000, as opposed to the appellant’s claim of Rs.10,50,000 for improvements, which lacked evidence.
Issue 3: Addition of Rs.28,24,895 related to the sale of property A-3/19, Paschim Vihar. The appellant declared capital gains in the subsequent year, citing payment receipt issues, but the AO taxed it in the year of sale.
Issue 4: Disallowance of Rs.14,98,184 in production expenses due to a lack of supporting evidence.
Tribunal Decision
The Tribunal carefully reviewed the submissions, assessment order, and the CIT (A)’s findings. Despite multiple notices, the appellant did not appear for the hearings, leading to the case being decided ex-parte based on available records.
Findings on Key Issues
Issue 1: The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs.18,79,659, agreeing with the CIT (A) that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence for the claimed purchase cost of the flat at Ireo Skyon.
Issue 2: The addition of Rs.20,51,232 was confirmed, as the appellant did not furnish evidence for the claimed cost of improvements on the Nangloi property.
Issue 3: The Tribunal agreed with the AO’s decision to tax the capital gains in the year of sale, as the sale deed for the Paschim Vihar property was executed during the relevant financial year, and no substantial evidence was provided to justify deferring the gains to the next year.
Issue 4: The disallowance of Rs.14,98,184 in production expenses was upheld due to the appellant’s failure to produce supporting evidence.
The Tribunal found that the AO and CIT (A) had made the additions and disallowances on cogent grounds, with no contrary evidence provided by the appellant to dispute their findings.
Conclusion
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by Jaideep Chopra, affirming the additions and disallowances made by the AO and upheld by the CIT (A).
Order pronounced in the open court on this 19th day of December, 2022.
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.