9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uential order passed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance to the directions of the CIT under section 263 the Assessing Officer has not made any variation to such income determined by him in the original assessment order. On a perusal of section 54B, it is evident that if the capital gain arising from sale of agricultural land is invested in purchase of agricultural land, then the assessee is eligible for exemption. Similarly section 54F provides that if the capital gain arising from transfer of long term capital asset, not being a residential house is utilized for purchase of a residential house, within a period of two years, then assessee will be eligible for exemption under section 54F. On a reading of the aforesaid provisions, we do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il works for LANCO Infratech. During the year assessee has executed contract work for a gross value of ₹ 3,60,00,000. He further noticed that the assessee has sub contracted a portion of work to the tune of ₹ 2,05,64,308 to third parties. However, assessee has not offered any commission/royalty on the works sub contracted to third parties. As observed by the Assessing Officer commission/royalty estimated at 2% on accrued basis on the sub contracted work amounting to ₹ 4,11,286 was added to the returned income. Accordingly assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide assessment order dated 7.4.2011 on a total income of ₹ 37,53,140. 3. The learned CIT Vijayawada in exercise of power under section 26 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issions of the assessee. As far as the issue of estimation of profit on contract work is concerned, the learned CIT while setting aside the assessment order directed the Assessing Officer to examine the issue and passed the assessment order de novo. So far as the claim of exemption under section 54F is concerned, the learned CIT observed that since the sale proceedings of agricultural land was invested for acquiring the asset other than agricultural land, assessee is not eligible for exemption under section 54F. With the aforesaid observations the impugned assessment order was set aside for de novo assessment. 5. At the outset the learned Authorised Representative fairly submitted before us that in the meantime the Assessing Officer has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t as in the consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance to the directions of the CIT under section 263 the Assessing Officer has not made any variation to such income determined by him in the original assessment order. Therefore, the only surviving issue arising for consideration is in relation to the assessee s claim of exemption under section 54F. As can be seen from the facts on record during the relevant previous year, assessee has sold agricultural land for a consideration of ₹ 75.00 lakhs. Out of the said amount assessee invested an amount of ₹ 61,91,151 in purchasing agricultural land and claimed exemption under section 54B of the Act. However, in purchasing agricultural land, an amount of ₹ 11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no restriction imposed under section 54F that capital gain derived from sale of agricultural land is not eligible for exemption under section 54F. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we do not find the reasoning of the learned CIT to be in accordance with the statutory provisions, hence acceptable. Moreover the ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Shri Satyanarayana (Supra) while deciding identical nature of dispute held as under: 4. After hearing the learned DR, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of learned CIT(A) as it was rightly held that Assessee is entitled to exemption under both section 54B 54F of IT Act and they are not mutually exclusive and independent of each other. Similar view was tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
