Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Kanniah Photo Studio Vs ITO (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : TCA No. 9 of 2015
Date of Judgement/Order : 15/06/2015
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Brief of the Case

In the present facts of the Case the Hon’ble High Court while interprating section 48 held that while calculating Capital gain the expenses made will only be considered if it is made “wholly or exclusive” for that property. Also, the Hon’ble High Court held that The Hon’ble Tribunal was right in taking into consideration of the Judgement of Jurisdictional High Court.

Facts of the Case

The appellant in this case sold land along with building for Rs.75 Lakhs. The appellant had taken mortgage loan on the said property from Bank. For clearing the mortgage, the appellant in respect of the aforesaid loan paid a sum of Rs.22,51,220 to the bank. While computing the capital gain, this amount of Rs.22,51,220 was claimed as expenses by the appellant under Section 48 (1) (i) of the Act. According to the AO, the loan in question had been obtained by mortgaging the property long time after acquiring the same and, therefore, the same is not covered under Section 48 (1) (i) of the Act and, therefore, disallowed the assessee’s claim for the purpose of computing the capital gains.

Held by CIT(A)

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031