9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Madras High Court in V.R. Karpagam (2014 (8) TMI 899 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ), the assessee is eligible for exemption even though the capital gain was invested in multiple residential units. New house purchased in the joint name of the assessee and her daughter - Held that:- This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when the assessee purchased a house in the joint name along with her daughter, the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 54F of the Act. The distinction made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee before Delhi High Court and his wife are living together may not be relevant consideration at all. What is to be considered is when the assessee purchased a house along with her legal heir for investment of capital gain, whether such investment is eligible for exemption under Section 54F of the Act? This was considered by the Delhi High Court in Kamal Wahal (2013 (1) TMI 401 - DELHI HIGH COURT ). The Delhi High Court held that the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 54F of the Act under such circumstances. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. Assessee is having one house ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on 07.05.2010 for a consideration of ₹ 51,00,000/- and another property at Balamore Road, Nagarcoil was sold on 28.10.2010 for a consideration of ₹ 39,00,000/-. According to the Ld. counsel, the assessee invested the entire sale consideration in two residential flats and produced copies of development agreements entered between the assessee and the flat promoters, M/s L T South City Projects. According to the Ld. counsel, the residential house was purchased in the joint name of assessee and her married daughter Dr.(Mrs.) Jeshija Roy Festus. The Ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee has taken the physical possession of property in 2012 and the same was let out. According to the Ld. counsel, both the properties were purchased on 28.10.2011 by means of registered sale deed. In fact, the registered sale deed for purchase of undivided share in the property was registered in both the cases on 28.10.2011. Placing reliance on the decision of this Bench of Tribunal in ITO v. Mrs. P.A. Sarala in I.T.A. No.1396/Mds/2013, the Ld.counsel submitted that this Tribunal, after considering the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT v. V.R. Karpagam in Tax case (Appeal) No.301 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 54F of the Act. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. We have carefully gone through the provisions of Section 54F of the Act which reads as follows:- (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), where, in the case of an assessee being an individual or a Hindu undivided family, the capital gain arises from the transfer of any longterm capital asset, not being a residential house (hereafter in this section referred to as the original asset), and the assessee has, within a period of one year before 1two years after the date on which the transfer took place purchased, or has within a period of three years after that date constructed, one residential house in india(hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset), the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say,-- (a) if the cost of the new asset is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, the whole of such capital gain shall not be charged under section 45: (b) if the cost of the new asset is less than the net considerati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case may be, clause (b), of sub-section (1), shall be deemed to be income chargeable under the head Capital gains relating to long-term capital assets of the previous year in which such new asset is transferred. (4) The amount of the net consideration 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 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 scheme 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 pur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance Act, 2014 with effect from 1.4.2015 by saying that constructed one residential house in India. This amendment was interpreted by Madras High Court in V.R. Karpagam (supra) and found that this amendment is applicable prospectively and based on that the assessee is eligible for exemption even though the assessee invested in multiple residential units. The year under consideration is 2011-12. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Madras High Court in V.R. Karpagam (supra), the assessee is eligible for exemption even though the capital gain was invested in multiple residential units. 7. The next objection of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee has purchased the new house in the joint name of the assessee and her daughter. The Assessing Officer distinguished the judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Kamal Wahal (2013) 351 ITR 4 on the ground that the assessee before the Delhi High Court was living with his wife together. The fact is that the assessee before the Delhi High Court purchased the house jointly with that of his wife. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when the assessee purchased a house in the joint name along with her daughter, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
