9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1257X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration in capital gain account scheme within the due date prescribed u/s 139(4) of the Act for reinvestment in another property, then the assessee should be treated as having satisfied the basic conditions of claiming deduction u/s 54F. The assessee had filed his return of income on 20.3.2012 which is well within the time limit prescribed u/s 139(4) and it is not in dispute that before the date of filing of such return, the assessee had duly deposited the sale consideration in capital gains account scheme. Hence the assessee would be entitled for deduction u/s 54F for the reinvestment made in the new property. There was no occasion for the AO to look into the total amount of reinvestment made by the assessee in new property in terms of section 54F - remand this issue to the file of the AO for the limited purpose of examination of reinvestment of ₹ 6 crores (actual sale consideration received) in new residential property and re-compute the long term capital gains accordingly. - Appeal of revenue allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A No. 1482/Kol/2014 - - - Dated:- 24-7-2017 - Shri A.T.Varkey, JM Shri M.Balaganesh, AM For the Appellant : G. Mallikarjun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allotted on 23.5.2012 for which full consideration was paid on 18.5.2012. For want of deposit in capital gains account scheme, the ld AO concluded that the assessee had not fulfilled the basic conditions for claiming of exemption u/s 54F(4) of the Act. He observed that the assessee in the instant case had deposited the sale consideration in the normal bank account maintained by him instead of specified bank account. Moreover, the due date of filing the return u/s 139(1) of the Act was 31.7.2011 but the assessee filed his return only on 20.3.2012 and till that date, the amount was kept by the assessee in the normal savings bank account. Based on these observations, the ld AO denied the benefit of deduction u/s 54F of the Act amounting to ₹ 4,10,68,863/- ( 1,55,88,863+2,54,80,000). The ld AO further observed that the sale consideration value adopted by the stamp valuation authority was ₹ 9,60,80,616/- and whereas the assessee had declared only ₹ 6,00,00,000/-. Accordingly, by invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act, he replaced the sale consideration figure at ₹ 9,60,80,616/- as against ₹ 6,00,00,000/- and after giving deduction towards indexe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sted in purchase of house property and accordingly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in fact and in law, in cancelling the assessment order without considering the implication of Section 50C of the I.T. Act, 1961, on the basis of which the value sale consideration declared by the assessee at 6,00,00,000/- had been rejected by the Assessing Officer who adopted the sale value at ₹ 9,60,80,616/- as assessed by the Registering Authority. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in law, in allowing exemption u/s 54F by treating the due date as specified u/s 139(4) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and not as specified in Section 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in violation of the decision of the Apex Court in Prakash Nath Khanna vs. CIT (2004) 266 ITR 1 (SC). 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter the grounds of appeal, if any. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. The facts stated hereinabove remain undisputed and hence the same are not reiterated for the sake of brevit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee has, within a period of one year before or two years after the date on which the transfer took place purchased, or has within a period of three years after that date constructed, a residential house in India (hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset) , the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say, - (a) if the cost of the new asset is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, the whole of such capital gain shall not be charged under section 45 ; (b) if the cost of the new asset is less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, so much of the capital gain as bears to the whole of the capital gain the same proportion as the cost of the new asset bears to the net consideration , shall not be charged under section 45: Provided .. ** ** ** Explanation,- for the purpose of this section,- net consideration , in relation to the transfer of a capital asset, means the full value of the consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
