9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 846X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 54F. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had sold 150 shares of C.J. Ltd. in June 1992 which were purchased by him prior to the year 1981 and sold for a consideration of ₹ 2,07,375 and the assessee claimed exemption under the provisions of section 54F on account of the amount invested by the assessee upto 15th October, 1992 towards construction of residential premises at Mawal Village. The details of amount invested towards the construction of said residential premises as recorded in Assessment Order at page 2 are re-produced below: A/c No. 14272 towards Construction of Residential Premises: Cost of Land as on 11-11-1988 87,500 Amt. invested on 5-9-1989 15,000 29-11-1989 15,000 14-2-1990 15,000 45,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-produced below: To Whomsoever it may concern "This is to certify that for that the construction of Residential Premises at Plot No. 6 Rustic Highlanded near Khandala for Ms. Arban N. Palia and others is now complete in all respects. The cost of structure is around ₹ 11,00,000 (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only)." (Copy of the certificate specifically required by the Bench was filed by the assessee on 27-1-2000 and is placed on file). So the following remains undisputed facts : (1) that the shares were sold on 17-6-1992 for consideration of ₹ 2,07,375. (2) that from 11-11-1988 to 8-5-1991 the assessee had invested ₹ 2,72,500 in the construction of new residential premises. (3) that after the investment of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the building was sold by the assessee in February, 1977 and the assessee had started the construction of new house in March, 1976. Thus, the facts do not favour the facts of the assessee's case. He has further drawn our attention towards the language of Section 54F in which he contended that it is clearly mentioned that the assessee is under an obligation to purchase the new residential house within a period of one year before or two years after the date on which the transfer took place or within a period of three years or after that date constructed a residential house. In the present case the assessee has not invested any amount within one year before the date of transfer of the shares. Thus, he was not entitled to any exemption under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th June, 1991 to 17th June, 1992. Now coming to the contention of the assessee that the material point had to be determined is when the new house is completed and it was completed only after the sale of the said shares and in view of the ratio of decision mentioned and relied upon the assessee was entitled to get the exemption under section 54F. Thus, it is necessary to go through the judgments relied upon by the AR. In the case of Smt. Beena K. Jain (supra). The facts were that the assessee sold office premises in July 1987 which resulted in long term capital gain. Prior to the sale the assessee entered into an agreement for purchase of a residential flat in September 1985 which agreement was registered on 27th October, 1985. The construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for grant of exemption under section 54F. So all the events in this case were within the parameters of Section 54F. In the present case the investment made by the assessee is not within the period of one year prior to the original asset. Thus, the ratio of this decision is also not applicable to the facts of the case. Now coming to the case of V.M. Dujodwala (supra) the facts of this case apparently seems to favour the contention of the assessee, but careful study thereof reveal that the facts are distinguishable as in the said case the assessee had sold a flat at Marine Drive, Bombay as per agreement dated 12th March, 1980, possession for which was given on 15th May, 1980 to the Buyer. An amount of ₹ 2,06,000 was treated by the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of certificate will suggest that the certificate in itself is vague as it does not specify the date of completion of the said house. All these exercises seem to have been made to come within the purview of section 54F as this is not a case where the assessee could be prevented by virtue of the things not in the control of the assessee to get the possession of the new asset or to show that incomplete. It is observed from the facts that the assessee's said house was complete by 8th May, 1991 and the amount shown to be expended on 6th April, 1992 and 15th October, 1992 as well as the certificate obtained from the Architecture were the exercises of the assessee to come within the four corners of Section 54F. We are unable to understand that ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
