9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equirement that assessee should also obtain the possession of the same within the period of three years. The emphasis is upon the utilization of the amount in purchase / construction of the new residential house. It is noted that undisputedly, the assessee invested a sum of ₹ 1,03,50,932 which was more than the capital gain earned by the assessee. In our opinion, the Ld.CIT(A) rightly drew support from the circular issued by the CBDT No.672 dt 16-12-1993. It is further noted by us that section 54 is a beneficial provision intending to provide benefits to the assessee with a view to boost investment in housing infrastructure. Thus, while interpreting such provisions, an effort should be made in the direction so as to find out how t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years from the transfer of original asset. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite of service of notice by RPAD. However, we find that the matter could be disposed of even without the presence of the assessee. Therefore, we heard the Ld. Ld. Departmental Representative and the appeal is disposed of on the basis of material available on record. 3. The solitary issue raised by the revenue challenges the action of the Ld.CIT(A) for allowing exemption of long term capital gain (LTCG in short) claimed by the assessee u/s 54 of the Act. 4. The brief facts and background of the case are that during the year under consideration assessee sold a flat for ₹ 1,17,00,000 on 04-03-20111 and earned LTCG of ₹ 69,23,238 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant failed to take possession new residential property within two years of sale of old residential property and the building was not complete as on 0303.2013 The A.O. throughout the assessment order went on applying the condition of purchase of new residential property within two years of sale of old property, however, she overlooked the prevailing condition of construction of new property within three years of sale of old property. In the instant case, the appellant sold the flat at Vanmali OHS, Navi Mumbal on 04.03,2011 for a consideration of ₹ 1,17,00,000 and capital gain thereon was arrived at ₹ 69,23,238/-. The appellant had purchased a new flat at Vijay Shree Krishna Homes in Navi Mumbai on 07.09.2011. The appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... guish the case of the appellant and CBDT circular no.672 dated 16.12.1933, relied upon by the appellant on the ground that the same is applicable to specified authorities. In this regard, the reliance is to be placed on the case of Srnt. Sunder Kaur Sujan Singh Gadh (2005) 3 SOT 206, Mumbai Bench of Tribunal, wherein it was held that the builder would fail in the /category of other institutions and, therefore, booking of the flat with the builder has to be treated as construction of flat by the assessee. 2.6 I have gone through the assessment order the submission made appellant in this regard. It is not in dispute that the appellant has purchased residential flat and has invested the entire capital gain for the purchase of said flat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ested in construction of new residential house within a period of 3 years. There is no specific requirement that assessee should also obtain the possession of the same within the period of three years. The emphasis is upon the utilization of the amount in purchase / construction of the new residential house. It is noted that undisputedly, the assessee invested a sum of ₹ 1,03,50,932 which was more than the capital gain earned by the assessee. In our opinion, the Ld.CIT(A) rightly drew support from the circular issued by the CBDT No.672 dt 16-12-1993. It is further noted by us that section 54 is a beneficial provision intending to provide benefits to the assessee with a view to boost investment in housing infrastructure. Thus, while in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
