9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated at Trichy or Bangalore is not owned by him. CIT also has brought no relevant material on record to show that both the house properties were owned by the assessee. The circumstances in which the income from both the house properties were shown in the return of income by the assessee is also not clear from materials available before us. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT and restore the issue back to the file of the CIT for proper enquiry and verification. - IT APPEAL NO. 837 (MDS.) OF 2012 - - - Dated:- 4-5-2012 - N.S. SAINI, V. DURGA RAO, JJ. ORDER N.S. Saini, Accountant Member This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT-I, Tiruchirappalli, dated 28.3.2012. 2. The assessee has ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purposes of section 54F of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT, vide order dated 28.3.2012 set aside the assessment order passed u/s 143 r.w.s 147 dated 27.10.2009 to re-examine the claim of exemption u/s 54F and to allow the same. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The A.R of the assessee filed before us a copy of the order of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT v. Madan Lal Bassi , [2004] 88 ITD 557(Chd.) and submitted that the Tribunal in that case has held that having in mind the amplitude of work 'assessment' and requirement of sections 45(1), 54F and 64(1A) to compute income of a minor child for purposes of addition in the total income of the father, it cannot be denied that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds of the assessee, the assessee was owner of two house properties situated at Trichy and Bangalore. The explanation of the assessee before the Assessing Officer was that he had given some money to his wife to purchase the property at Trichy and for the flat at Bangalore loan from HDFC Bank was jointly obtained with his wife and as installments of loan were paid by him, the income from house property was shown by him in his return of income. In view of the above explanation, the CIT was of the view that the assessee was deemed owner of the two house properties and therefore, not entitled for deduction u/s 54F of the Act. 7. Before us, the A.R relied on the decision in the case of ACIT v Madan Lal Bassi ( supra ) for the submission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with an agreement to live apart, or to a minor child not being a married daughter, shall be deemed to be the owner of the house property so transferred; " 10. However, the explanation of the assessee before the lower authorities was that he has given money to his wife for purchase of house at Trichy. Regarding flat at Bangalore, the assessee explained that loan was taken from HDFC Bank in the joint name with his wife and the repayment of loan was made from his account. In the above circumstances, income from these properties was shown in the return of income in view of the provisions of section 64 of the Act. 11. In our considered opinion, the provisions of section 64 are attracted when house property in question was transferred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and therefore, the said decision is not squarely applicable to the facts of the case. In our considered view, if the house properties situated at Trichy and Bangalore are owned by the assessee's wife then the same cannot be considered as owned by the assessee for disallowing exemption u/s 54F of the Act. We find that the assessee has brought no material before us to show that either the house property situated at Trichy or Bangalore is not owned by him. As already held herein above that the CIT also has brought no relevant material on record to show that both the house properties were owned by the assessee. The circumstances in which the income from both the house properties were shown in the return of income by the assessee is also not c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
