9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese circumstances, we do not find any error in arriving at such a conclusion. Therefore, we are of the view that the said substantial question of law would not arise for consideration in this appeal. Accumulated balance upto retirement eligible for exemption u/s 10(12) - Held that:- In the instant case, The assessee retired on 1-4-2002. As on that date, the amount accumulated in the Provident Fund was ₹ 37,93,888/-. He did not withdraw the same. He sought to withdraw it on 11-4-2011. The accumulated balance as on that date was ₹ 82,00,783/- which constituted the interest on the amount of ₹ 37,93,588/- as on 1-4-2018 on wards. By relying on the provisions of Section 10(12) the Tribunal held that so far as to the exten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vident fund amount, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted ₹ 82,00,783/- without rendering any finding in respect of the interest received on Provident Fund balance. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue and assessee approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee s cross-objection. Questioning the same, the Revenue has filed this appeal on the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that assessee is entitled for Section 54 deduction in respect of amount invested within one year as non-completion of the construction of flat was beyond the control of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said investment is made towards construction of the property. Therefore, it requires to be exempted. Under these circumstances, we do not find any error in arriving at such a conclusion. Therefore, we are of the view that the said substantial question of law would not arise for consideration in this appeal. 4. However, the learned counsel for the appellants pleads that based on the available material, yet another substantial question of law arises for consideration. Therefore, he has filed a memo indicating the substantial question of law. The same reads as under: Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that a sum of ₹ 37,93,588/- being the accumulated balance upto retirement is eligible for exemption under Section 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
