9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal No.396/12-13 dated 24.02.2015 is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in upholding the action of the Id. Assessing Officer in disallowing the benefit to the appellant under section 54F of Rs. 53,63,363/-. 3. That in the in facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in not admitting additional evidence although it goes to the root of the matter and was to support the facts already submitted before the Ld Assessing officer. 4. That the appellant craves to add, amend or alter any ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal with the permission of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d additional evidence being the agreement to sell the impugned property dated 3.2.2010 and drew attention to clause-C of the agreement which stated that the seller had delivered the actual physical and vacant possession of the said house to the purchaser w.e.f. the date of the agreement. The assessee pointed out that in view of the fact that the possession of the house was delivered to the purchaser, the sale had got completed and assessee was, therefore, the owner of the only one house property on the date of the sale of this asset on which it had returned long term capital gain and thus, was entitled to deduction under section 54F of the Act. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) dismissed the ground raised by the assessee by holding that in the first pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee filed an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules submitting the following documents as additional evidence : Sr.No. Particulars 1) Copy of Agreement to sell dated 03.02.2010. 2) Copy of General power of attorney. 3) Copy of Will 4) Copy of Agreement to sell dated 16.10.2010. 7. Further, the assessee submitted through the application that the documents now filed in the shape of agreement to sell, Power of Attorney and copy of Will in respect of sale of House No.939/1, Sector 40-A, Chandigarh were necessary for deciding the issue at hand and went to the root of the matter to prove the claim of the assessee under section 54F of the Act It was also submitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther been written in the Rule that 'but if the Tribunal requires any document to be produced.........' Thus it is very clear that the assesse can not suo motto furnish any additional evidence. It is only when the Tribunal requires, the additional evidence can be produced. This is all the more clear as in the second part of this Rule, the word 'allow' has been used i.e. if the income tax authorities have decided the case without giving sufficient opportunity to the assesse to adduce evidence, the Tribunal may allow such document to be produced...... . In this case, there is no plea of the assesse that the department had not allowed it sufficient opportunity. Moreover, when no mind has been applied by the Ld. CIT(A) on a piece ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut also situations where the fresh evidence would enable the Tribunal to pass order or for any other substantial cause. Further, the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mukta Metal Works (supra) has also held that the additional evidence necessary for just decision of the matter cannot be declined to be considered as additional evidence. In view of the same, we admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee. 11. Having said so, we now proceed to adjudicate the issue at hand. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the assessee had been wrongly denied its claim of deduction under section 54F of the Act, since the assessee was the owner of only one property as on the date of the sale of the original asset and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee relied upon the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Smt.Shashi Gupta Vs. ITO in ITA No.609/Del/2012 dated 24.11.2015 in this regard. The learned counsel for the assessee pointed out that in the aforestated case, the I.T.A.T. had held that the registration of transfer in accordance with the agreement to sell cannot be termed as the date of transfer, relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjev Lal & Anr. Vs. CIT & Anr. (2014) 365 ITR 389 (SC). The learned counsel for the assessee further pointed out to the findings of the I.T.A.T. rejecting the conclusion of the CIT (Appeals) in that case that the agreement to sell is a mere start of sale and cannot become the act of the sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
