9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Dated:- 18-2-2019 - Shri Shamim Yahya, AM And Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM For the Appellant : Shri Chaitanya Anjarla For the Respondent : Shri Nishant K. Ruparel ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, A. M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-56, Mumbai ( ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 24.01.2015 and pertains to the assessment year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal read as under: 1. Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing deduction under section 54 for investment of capital gain in purchase of new residential house in Panama and thus allowing the shifting of tax base of India to foreign country, whereas provisions of Income Tax act extends to India only and not extra territorial? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred by not following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of American Hotel Lodging Association Educational Institute Vs. CBDT(2008 170 Taxman 306 SC) Where it was held that for claim of exemptions u/s 10(23c)(vi), non profit qualifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the exemption. The contention of the assessee is not tenable at all. When restriction is brought in the Act for investment in the property abroad itself indicates that the process of investment was on the wrong track. It has been interpreted and used against the intend and sprit of the legislation framed to give benefit to the tax payers of the country. The Income Tax Act is promulgated by the Indian Constitution and went on through the process of insertion and deletion of certain provisions and sections through the bills passed by the parliament on proposals kept before the House in the Budget Session. The proposals are made after the same were studied as per the changing Economic scenario in the country and Ws impact on the Indian society. Any exemption under the Act is a prethought in the context of Economical and Fiscal impact involving welfare angle for the citizen of the country. The scope of the Income Tax Act thus, confides to the limit of the territory of the Country. The scope of the Act is also limited so far as to tax the income arising out side the Country is concerned. In a nutshell the provisions of the section 54 of the I.T. Act does not apply in Panama and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant also reflect that the law has been recently amended in the finance bill 2014-15 to restrict investment in property abroad to claim exemption under Section 54, itself implies that the said investment was allowed to claim the benefit of the exemption. However, the amendment is not retrospective the assessee had entered in to this transaction in the Financial Year 2011-12 when the said amendment was not declared. Hence, the appellant is a bonafide tax payer and should not be penalized for the amendments that have taken effect subsequently. Furthermore, the appellant has placed reliance on various case laws which uphold the decision that claim under section 54 for deduction cannot be rejected on grounds that new house was purchased in a foreign country, in currency of said country and purchase amount was more than sale proceeds of Indian house property. The said reliance is placed on the following case laws: N. Ranganathan v Income Tax Officer [2014] 56 Chennai Tribunal ITAT Chennai Bench C Mrs. Prema Shah v Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(4) [2006] 100 ITD 60 (Mum), ITAT Mumbai Bench Accordingly, considering the facts of the case, contentions of the appellant r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he new asset made within one year before the date on which the transfer of the original asset took place, or which is not utilised by him for the purchase or construction of the new asset before the date of furnishing the return of income under section 139, shall be deposited by him before furnishing such return [such deposit being made in any case not later than the due date applicable in the case of the assessee for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139] in an account in any such bank or institution as may be specified in, and utilised in accordance with, any scheme which the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, frame in this behalf and such return shall be accompanied by proof of such deposit; and, for the purposes of sub-section (1), the amount, if any, already utilised by the assessee for the purchase or construction of the new asset together with the amount so deposited shall be deemed to be the cost of the new asset : Provided that if the amount deposited under this sub-section is not utilised wholly or partly for the purchase or construction of the new asset within the period specified in sub-section (1), then,- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
