9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... total income of Rs. 1,83,040/- which was revised on 30.03.2011 with total taxable income to Rs. 3,12,140/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.30.12.2011 and the total taxable income was determined at Rs. 3,12,139/- and the taxable long term capital gains at Rs. 1,26,41,650/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld. CIT(A), who vide order dt.31.03.2015 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)-4/ITO, Wd-4/597/2011-12) granted substantial relief to the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised the following grounds : "1. The order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is contrary to law and to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te on which the transfer took place or within a period of three years after the date constructed a residential house and the balance amount which was not utilized by the assessee for the purpose of construction of new asset should have been deposited in a specified bank account before filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. In case of the assessee, AO noticed that assessee had failed to deposit the amount of capital gains in the capital gain account as required u/s 54(2) of the Act before the date of furnishing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. He accordingly denied the claim of the deduction u/s 54 of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who relying on the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cified bank account till the time of purchase of new flat. On the issue of deposit of unutilized capital gains in specified bank account, we find that Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Humayun Suleman Merchant (supra) has held that the mandate of Sec.54F(4) of the Act is clear that the amount which has not been utilized either in purchase / construction of house before filing return of income has to be deposited in the account duly notified by Central Government for claiming exemption. We are therefore of the view that in the present case, following the decision of Hon'ble High Court in the case of Humayun Suleman (supra), AO was justified in denying the claim of deduction u/s 54 of the Act. It is a settled law that the decisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
