The Appellate Tribunal has held that before CIT(A), assessee supported its claim by valuation report as well as sale deed. Assessee had also supported his claim with site plan sanctioned by U.P. Avas Avam Vikas Parishad, Bareily. CIT(A) called for a remand report, where AO accepted fact of construction carried out by assessee at first floor in 1994-95, however in absence of documentary evidence of expenditure, claim was not accepted by AO. CIT(A) also confirmed rejection of claim on similar reasoning. Once factum of construction of first floor and a multi at second floor was accepted then claim of cost of construction could not be rejected out rightly without examining correctness of amount of claim. (AY. 2009-10)