Brij Bhushan Aggrawal v. Officer of Income-tax
[Citation -2017-LL-0830-1]

Citation 2017-LL-0830-1
Appellant Name Brij Bhushan Aggrawal
Respondent Name Officer of Income-tax
Court HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 30/08/2017
Assessment Year 2014-15
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags additional evidence • actual expenditure • sale consideration • levelling of land • legal infirmity • returned income • question of law • sale of land • long-term capital gain
Bot Summary: The Assessee filed return of income for the Financial Year 2012-13 on 13th August, 2014 showing the income from long term capital gain/loss as well as income from other sources and net agricultural income. In all, the Assessee declared an income of Rs.3,00,090/-. In the Assessment Order dated 26th November, 2015 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer found that the Assessee had sold 20 bighas of land for a total sale consideration of ITA No.719/2017 Page 1 of 3 Rs.70,54,000/-. In the absence of any proof of having spent the above amount, the AO added the said amount to the returned income of the Assessee. The Assessee then carried the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax CIT(A). The Assessee then approached the ITAT. It is seen from the impugned order of the ITAT that the Assessee sought to submit some additional evidence in the form of Certificate of Licence granted by the Municipal Corporation of Muzaffarnagar dated 14th January, 2005 and the Affidavit dated 21st December, 2016 of the Sarpanch of the village. The mere fact that a Certificate of Licence was issued to the Assessee for running a kiln on the Bhatta land in question furnishes no proof of the expenditure of Rs.9,78,125/- incurred by the Assessee in filling it up.


IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 719/2017 BRIJ BHUSHAN AGGRAWAL Appellant Through: Ms. Anu Sura, Adv. for Mr. Sameer Jain, Advocate versus OFFICER OF INCOME TAX Respondent Through: None CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER 30.08.2017 CM 31478/2017 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. ITA 719/2017 & CM No.31479/2017 (stay) 2. This is Assessee s appeal against order dated 24th April, 2017 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) in ITA No. 214/Del/2017 for Assessment Year 2014-15. 3. Assessee filed return of income for Financial Year 2012-13 on 13th August, 2014 showing income from long term capital gain (LTCG)/loss as well as income from other sources and net agricultural income. In all, Assessee declared income of Rs.3,00,090/-. In Assessment Order dated 26th November, 2015 under Section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act ), Assessing Officer (AO) found that Assessee had sold 20 bighas of land for total sale consideration of ITA No.719/2017 Page 1 of 3 Rs.70,54,000/-. In computation of LTCG, Assessee claimed to have incurred expenses of Rs.9,78,125/- on account of filling of soil in Bhatta land. AO by means of Order Sheet Entry dated 6th October, 2015 asked Assessee to substantiate this claim. In response thereto, Assessee filed his personal affidavit on 9th November, 2015 stating that he had invested Rs.5 Lakhs on contract basis for purpose of filling up of land including cost of soil, loading transportation of soil, unloading and levelling of land in year 2004. He claimed that he had not maintained books of accounts for said expenses. In absence of any proof of having spent above amount, AO added said amount to returned income of Assessee. 4. Assessee then carried matter in appeal to Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT(A) ]. By order dated 4th October 2016, CIT (A) dismissed appeal on ground that even during appellate proceedings, Assessee could not furnish any evidence to support his claim. 5. Assessee then approached ITAT. It is seen from impugned order of ITAT that Assessee sought to submit some additional evidence in form of Certificate of Licence granted by Municipal Corporation of Muzaffarnagar dated 14th January, 2005 and Affidavit dated 21st December, 2016 of Sarpanch of village. ITAT however declined to permit Assessee to rely on such additional evidence. ITAT concurred with CIT (A) and dismissed appeal. 6. This Court has perused additional evidence produced by Assessee ITA No.719/2017 Page 2 of 3 before ITAT. It does not advance case of Assessee any further. mere fact that Certificate of Licence was issued to Assessee for running kiln on Bhatta land in question furnishes no proof of expenditure of Rs.9,78,125/- incurred by Assessee in filling it up. certificate of Sarpanch again says very little about actual expenditure incurred. It merely states that almost 10 to 12 years ago, filling of bricks on land had been done by Assessee at high cost. Such certificate without any documentary basis does not help Assessee s case. 7. Consequently, this Court is unable to find any legal infirmity in concurrent findings of CIT (A) and ITAT that Assessee was unable to substantiate claim of having incurred expenses of Rs. Rs. 9,78,125/- in filling up land. 8. No substantial question of law arises from impugned order of ITAT. appeal and application are accordingly dismissed. S. MURALIDHAR, J. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. AUGUST 30, 2017 pk ITA No.719/2017 Page 3 of 3 Brij Bhushan Aggrawal v. Officer of Income-tax
Report Error