9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 160 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 54 - capital gains invested outside India for purchase of residential house i.e. Dubai - LTCG received on sale of residential property - scope of amendment to Sec. 54 by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 had w.e.f 01.04.2015 - HELD THAT - Amendment as per which the term constructed a residential house has been substituted by constructed, one residential house in India , vide the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 w.e.f 01.04.2015, in itself reveals the legislative intent of restricting the exemption available under the aforesaid statutory provision only in respect of a residential house which was either constructed or purchased by the assessee in India with effect from assessment year 2015-16 and the aforesaid amendment under consideration to Sec. 54 was to be given a prospective effect from A.Y. 2015-16. We are of the considered view that as the entitlement of an assessee to claim exemption under Sec.54 was not qualified by any such condition that the investment towards the construction or purchase of the new residential house was to be made in India during the year under consideration, hence the claim of exemption so raised by him under Sec. 54 in respect of the new residential house that was purchased by him at Dubai, UAE was well in order. No infirmity emerges from the order passed by the CIT(A), who had rightly directed the A.O to grant exemption to the assessee under Sec. 54 in respect of the investment made by him in the residential property in Dubai, UAE, thus uphold his order. - Decided against revenue
Issues Involved:
1. Eligibility of deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for capital gains invested in a residential house outside India. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Eligibility of Deduction under Section 54 for Investments Abroad: The primary issue in this case was whether the capital gains invested in a new residential house in Dubai are eligible for deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee, a non-resident Indian, had declared a total income of ?8,03,790 for the assessment year 2014-15. The scrutiny assessment revealed that the assessee had claimed exemption under Section 54 for the entire amount of long-term capital gains (LTCG) arising from the sale of a residential property in India, which was invested in a new residential house in Dubai. The Assessing Officer (A.O) denied the exemption on the grounds that the exemption under Section 54 was available only for investments in residential properties in India. The A.O assessed the income of the assessee at ?7,24,82,580. 2. CIT(A)'s Ruling: The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who ruled in favor of the assessee. The CIT(A) noted that the issue should be considered in the context of the period before the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2014, which came into effect from 01.04.2015. The CIT(A) observed that prior to this amendment, Section 54 did not explicitly require the investment to be made in India. The CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in Leena Jugalkishor Shah Vs. ACIT and the ITAT Mumbai's decision in ITO Vs. Mr. Nishant Lalit Jadhav, which supported the assessee's claim. 3. Revenue's Appeal: The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order, contending that the investment in a residential property in Dubai shifted the tax base from India, which was not the legislature's intention. The Departmental Representative argued that the exemption under Section 54 was intended only for investments in residential properties in India. 4. Tribunal's Analysis: The Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 54 as they stood during the relevant assessment year (A.Y. 2014-15). It noted that the statute did not explicitly require the investment to be made in India before the amendment by the Finance Act, 2014. The Tribunal referred to the legislative intent behind the amendment, which was to restrict the exemption to investments in residential properties situated in India from A.Y. 2015-16 onwards. The Tribunal also cited the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in Leena Jugalkishor Shah Vs. ACIT, which held that the benefit of Section 54F (a similarly placed provision) was available for investments in residential houses outside India before the amendment. Additionally, the Tribunal referenced decisions from the ITAT Mumbai and ITAT Bangalore, which supported the view that the pre-amended Section 54 did not restrict the location of the new residential house to India. 5. Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the pre-amended Section 54 did not contain any requirement that the new residential house had to be situated in India. Therefore, the assessee's investment in a residential property in Dubai was eligible for exemption under Section 54. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order and dismissed the revenue's appeal. Order Pronouncement: The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 27.02.2019.
|
