M/s Chandrakant H. Kakkad, RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

ITA 126/RJT/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7888 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 54

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH , RAJKOT BEFORE: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND S H RI AMARJIT SINGH , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [CONDUCTED THROUGH E - COURT AT AHMEDABAD] CHANDRAKANT H. KAKKAD, 7 - VISHALINAGAR, NR. JIVANHAR SOCIETY, B/H MAHILA COLLEGE, RAJKOT PAN: ACYPK4009K (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, WA RD - 4(2), RAJKOT (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI ANIL KUMAR DAS , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 0 7 - 0 1 - 2 020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 - 01 - 2 020 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - T HE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) - 2, GANDHINAGAR ON 2 7 - 02 - 2017. THE APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING FIRSTLY ON 04 - 12 - 2019 AND THEREAFTER ON 07 - 01 - 2020 . NOTICE OF HEARING WAS S ENT BY RPAD. NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ANYBODY - ELSE ON HIS BEHALF HAS APPEARANCE ON ANY OF THE AFORESAID DATES . THE ASSESSEE HAS I T A NO . 126 / RJT /20 17 A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 6 - 07 I.T.A NO. 126 /RJT /20 17 A.Y . 2006 - 07 PAGE NO CHANDRAKANT H. KAKKAD VS. ITO 2 FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GENUINENESS OF CLAIM OF EXPENSES INCURRED W ITH RELEVANT EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO FAILED TO PROVE THE FULFILLMENT OF REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 54 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF CLAIM OF DEDUCTION FROM CAPITAL G A IN FOR INVESTMENT IN THE NEW PROPERTY. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO REFE RRED THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HUMAYU N SULEMAN MERCHANT VS. CC IT VIDE ITA NO. 545 OF 2002 DATED 18/08/2006 BEFORE R EJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF CI T (A) SHOWS THAT ALL THE ISSU ES RAISED BY TH E ASSESSEE AND THE SUBMISSION MADE BY HIM IN SUPPORT THEREOF HAVE DULY BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE CIT(A). NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE US TO REBUT THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE CIT (A). IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL TO REBUT THE REASONIN G GIVEN BY THE CIT (A) IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCLUSION REACHED BY HIM, WE HAVE NO ALTERNATI VE EXCEPT TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND S DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OUR T ON 20 - 01 - 20 20 SD/ - SD/ - (MAHAVIR PRASAD ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 20 /01/2020 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. C ONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, I.T.A NO. 126 /RJT /20 17 A.Y . 2006 - 07 PAGE NO CHANDRAKANT H. KAKKAD VS. ITO 3 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT