9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1076X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uction under section 54F in respect of the cost of construction of the residential property and even the D.R. has not raised any objection for admission of the same, the additional evidence filed by the assessee is admitted. As rightly contended by the D.R., the AO is required to give an opportunity to verify the said additional evidence, which is filed by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal. We accordingly restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 54F in respect of cost of construction of residential house property afresh in the light of the additional evidence filed by the assessee. Additional ground claiming that for computing the deducti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has Agarwal , Advocate For The Department : Shri C. J . Singh, Sr. D.R. ORDER Per Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-President (KZ):- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata dated 28.02.2017. 2. The common issue involved in Grounds No. 1 2 of this appeal relates to the disallowance of assessee s claim for deduction under section 54F as made by the Assessing Officer amounting to ₹ 99,95,500/, which is restricted by the ld. CIT(Appeals) to ₹ 22,01,396/-. 3. The assessee in the present case is an individual, who filed her return of income for the year under consideration on 30.03.2014 declaring total income of ₹ 2,76,690/-. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of land. As regards the cost of construction of residential house property amounting to ₹ 22,67,700/- as claimed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer found that even though the relevant evidence in the form of bills for construction of house was furnished by the assessee, no evidence was produced by him to show that the construction of house was completed within the time stipulated in section 54F. He accordingly disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 54F in respect of cost of construction of residential house property also amounting to ₹ 22,67,700/- and determined the total income of the assessee at ₹ 1,02,72,190/- in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 14.03.2016 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed additional evidence in the form of completion certificate for the residential house property constructed by the assessee issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat on 31.03.2014 to support and substantiate the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 54F in respect of the cost of construction of the residential property. He has also filed an application seeking admission of the said additional evidence stating therein that the authorities below did not afford sufficient and specific opportunity to the assessee to produce the said additional evidence. Since the said additional evidence is a relevant evidence to adjudicate upon the issue involved in the case of the assessee related to its claim for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed to the assessee under section 54F keeping in view the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Smt. Chandrakala Devi Bansal vs.- ITO (ITA No. 2481/KOL/2005 dated 20.04.2007) and in the case of ACIT vs.- Harmeet Kaur (ITA No. 1482/KOL/2014 dated 10.10.2018). 8. In Ground No. 3, the assessee has challenged the action of the ld. CIT(Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to tax the capital gains of ₹ 77,94,104/- for A.Y. 2015-16 by initiating the proceedings under section 147 on the ground that the ld. CIT(Appeals) exceeded his jurisdiction while giving the said direction. 9. We have heard the arguments of both the sides on this issue and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
