9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pervening impossibilities to constructed the residential property beyond three years of the prescribed time limit – against assessee. - IT Appeal No.2147(Mds) of 2011 - - - Dated:- 20-3-2012 - Dr. O.K. NARAYANAN, CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JJ. ORDER Dr. O.K. Narayanan, Vice-President This appeal filed by the assessee relates to the assessment year 1995-96. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-XII at Chennai, dated 21-10-2011. The appeal arises out of the order passed under section 143(3), read with section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee in the present case, had sold a property in Chennai on 27-2-1995 for a consideration of Rs. 95 lakhs. In filing her return of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Shri KEB Rengarajan, the learned standing counsel appearing for the Revenue. 7. In the first round of second appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has directed to adopt the fair market value of the property at Rs. 2 lakhs per ground. On that basis the Assessing Officer has worked out capital gains at Rs. 72,49,400/-. The claim of the assessee is that she has purchased a vacant plot at Akshaya Colony for a consideration of Rs. 8,92,136/-, admeasuring 2400 sft.. The plot was purchased for constructing a residential property therein. The further contention of the assessee towards deduction under section 54 is that the assessee has given advances to three parties for acquiring the new property and that the same was not complete becaus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... detail. The case of the assessee is that the assessee could not comply with the provisions of section 54 within the time prescribed for reasons beyond her control, inasmuch as the money, which was blocked by her by paying advances to procure the property, was not realized within the time and, therefore, she could not make any alternative investment within the prescribed time. It is the case of the assessee that the acquisition of the property has been completed in 2001-02 and, therefore, deduction under section 54 may be granted, condoning the period of delay caused in complying with the time limit prescribed under section 54. 11. There are instances of decisions rendered by various Benches of the Tribunal in extending the benefit of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
