9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ideration received from the transfer of long term capital asset in the specified securities. ii.The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have noted that when the assessee opted for receipt of sale consideration in the form of flats she had by choice foregone the benefit accruing out of investment of the net consideration in the specified securities as per the provisions of section 54EA of the IT Act and therefore there was no question of allowing such exemption under section 54EA of the IT Act for no such investment was made in the specified securities. iii.The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also ought to have held that the decision of the Bombay Tribunal in the case of Bombay Housing Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT ( 81 ITD 545 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court in the case of Bombay Housing Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT, 81 ITD 545. 3.2 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) after considering the submissions observed as under: "The assessee s submissions are carefully considered. The Assessing Officer has denied exemption under section 54EA mainly on the ground that investment has not been made directly out of sale consideration, otherwise, the assessee is eligible for exemption under section 54EA of the I.T. Act. In the circumstances and in view of the Bombay Tribunal s decision relied on by the assessee, the Assessing Officer is directed to allow exemption under section 54EA of the I.T. Act." 4. Before us, the learned DR submitted that long term capital gain has arisen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cified securities, then deduction under section 54EA will be available. It is not necessary that consideration received in cash from the transfer of long term capital asset should be invested in the specified securities. The view taken by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is on the basis of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Bombay Housing Corporation (Supra). The Bombay Tribunal held that purposive interpretation is to be given to section 54E, so that assessee may claim exemption even in a case where the consideration has accrued. We are in agreement with the decision of the Bombay High Court. The Bombay High Court relied on the decision of the Ahmedabad Bench in the case of I.A.C. Jayantilal Chandanlal, 26 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
