9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'The Act'). 3. The material facts are as follows; The assesseee is an individual. During the previous year relevant assessment year 2006-07, the assessee derived long term capital gains of Rs. 1,04,81,067/-, The assessee invested Rs. 23.00 lakhs REC Bonds and claimed exemption of this expenditure u/s 54EC of the Act. The same was allowed by the AO. The assessee also claimed that it had also invested capital gain to the extent of Rs. 85.00 lakhs in purchase of a residential house and was entitled to exemption from tax on capital gain to the extent of such investment. 4. The AO noticed that the claim of the assesseee for investment in purchase of a residential house was in respect of a property in survey no.65/1, of Kembathahalli Village, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal, by the assessee, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO giving rise to the present appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal. 6. We have hard the rival submissions. The facts as can be culled out from the documents in the paper book filed by the assessee shows that the assessee purchased the property in question under a sale deed dated 04-07-2005. The description of the property purchased as given in Schedule-B to the sale deed shows that alongwith 19.6 guntas of land 4 squares built-up residential house was also transferred to the assessee. Further, the property has been assessed to tax by the Bangalore Zilla Parishad and the description of the tax in their records is 'house tax'. The Bangalore Electrical Supply Co.,Ltd.,(BE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... structure which might under some circumstances, be used for residence. On a perusal of the aforesaid judgment, we find that it was not in dispute in that case that the property in question was a plot having boundary wall and a garage-cum-room constructed thereon. It is in those circumstances, the Hon'ble Court came to the conclusion, that it was not fit for habitation and therefore, cannot be considered as a residential house. In our opinion, the aforesaid judgment cannot be applied to the facts of the present case, where the assessee contends that there was a house fit for habitation measuring 4 squares building which is being assessed to tax by the Municipal authorities. Another decision relied upon by the CIT(A) was that of the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt case no such evidence has been brought on record. Finally, learned DR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Dr.A.S.Atwal Vs CIT (277 ITR 462) (P&H). It was again a case of exemption u/s 54 of the Act and stands on the same footing as the case of the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench namely ITO Vs Smt. Rohini Reddy.(supra). 9. As we have already seen the evidence filed by the assessee in the present case, in our opinion sufficiently justifies the existence of a house. The claim of the assessee is that it was habitable and there is no material on record to disbelieve the claim of the assessee. At this point of time, it is not possible to verify the condition of the building and or to whether it was habitable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
