Meeta Hasmukh Gandhi Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
From the details, it is evident that assessee is claiming cost of improvement, which are consumable items on account of furnishing sofa etc. The authorities below are correct that these items cannot be considered as cost of improvement for computation of capital gain.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-38 dated 29.05.2019 and pertains to assessment year 2016-17.
2. Grounds of appeal read as under:-
1. On the facts in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld.CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition of a sum of Rs. 5,09,120/- made u/s. 68 by considering cash deposits as cash credits.
2. On the facts, in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT-A has further erred in upholding the disallowance of indexed cost of improvement consisting of Repairs, renovation, furniture and fixtures amounting to Rs.24,47,045/- while Computing capital gain/ loss on sale of house property.
3. Alternatively, the Ld. CIT-A has erred in not allowing indexed cost of furniture and fixture as a deduction as the agreement for sale specifically mentioned that the sale of premises was along with furniture and fixtures and a sale consideration included the value of furniture and fixture.
3. Apropos ground No.1, the issue of addition u/s.68
On this issue on verification of details of bank statement submitted by the assessee during the scrutiny assessment proceedings, it was seen by AO that during the year under consideration, the assessee has made certain cash deposits in his bank accounts maintained with Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and Aixs Bank Ltd. The details of which are as under.
