9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 902X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - such liberal interpretation cannot be extended beyond a point so to cover investments made in the names of other blood relations or other relations – there was no infirmity in the order – Decided against Assessee. - ITA No.389/Hyd/13 - - - Dated:- 4-7-2013 - Shri Chandra Poojari And Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Laxmi Niwas Sharma For the Respondent : Smt. Amish S. Gupt ORDER Per Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan, Judicial Member: This appeal by the assessees is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) II, Hyderabad dated 10.12.2012 for the assessment year 2005-06. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that assessee is an individual working as a Joint Managing Director in M/s. Deepak Transport Agency. Assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2005-06 disclosing an income of Rs.2,00,260. The assessment was reopened and during the re-assessment proceedings, Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee sold house property of which he was a co-owner having 20% share. The total proceeds realised on the property was Rs.1,67,44,140 and during the assessment year 2004-05, the assessee along with other co-owners p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e new residential property shall be purchased in the name of the assessee only. It merely says that the assessee should have purchased/constructed a residential house. 3. The learned CIT(A)-II erred in concluding that the house property cannot be purchased in the name of nephew/sister-in-law, ignoring the fact that assessee in the present case has not purchased the new house in the name of stranger or person unconnected with him. 4. ....." 5. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri Laxmi Niwas Sharma reiterating the contentions urge before the lower authorities submitted that the Revenue authorities are not justified in denying the exemption claimed by the assessee. In support of his contentions, he relied on the following decisions- (a) Order dated 10.8.2012 of Hyderabad bench 'A' in the case of N.Ram Kumar Hyderabad V/s. ACIT, Cir.6(1) Hyderabad (ITA No.1901/Hyd/2011 dated 10.8.2012); (b) Decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Shri Kamal Wahal, vide judgment dated 11.1.2013 in ITA 4/2013; (c) Decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Ravinder Kumar Arora, vide judgment dated 27.9.2011 in ITA No.1106 of 2011; (d) Decision of the Ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of the capital gain. (2) The amount of the capital gain which is not appropriated by the assessee towards the purchase of the new asset made within one year before the date on which the transfer of the original asset took place, or which is not utilised by him for the purchase or construction of the new asset before the date of furnishing the return of income under section 139, shall be deposited by him before furnishing such return [such deposit being made in any case not later than the due date applicable in the case of the assessee for furnishing the return of income under sub- section (1) of section 139] in an account in any such bank or institution as may be specified in, and utilised in accordance with, any scheme71 which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, frame in this behalf and such return shall be accompanied by proof of such deposit; and, for the purposes of sub-section (1), the amount, if any, already utilised by the assessee for the purchase or construction of the new asset together with the amount so deposited shall be deemed to be the cost of the new asset : Provided that if the amount deposited under this sub-section is not u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eficial provisions have to be interpreted liberally, there is a limit for such liberal interpretation, and it cannot be stretched beyond that point. In the present case, the assessee had claimed exemption for the investment made by the sister-in-law and nephew stating that they are blood relations. 9. The case-laws relied upon by the learned counsel are clearly distinguishable. In the case of N.Ram Kumar (supra) decided by the Hyderabad Bench 'A' of the Tribunal, claim for exemption under S.54F of the Act was in respect of investment made in the purchase of a flat in the name of a minor daughter. Similarly, in the case of Kamal Wahal (supra), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observed that under S.54F, the new residential house need not be purchased by the assessee in his own name, nor is it necessary that it should be purchased exclusively in his own name. It is however, to be noted that the assessee in the present case has not purchased a new house in the name of stranger or somebody who is unconnected to him. Assessee has purchased it only in the name of his wife. 10. Further, in the case of Ravinder Kumar Arora (supra) before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the property has been p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
