9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been made for Flat Nos.489 and 490 after the extended period expired on 31st March 2015. The assessee despite taking specific plea before the CIT(A) and relied upon several decisions, the Ld. CIT(A) did not decide this issue in the light of decisions. Therefore, it requires actual verification how much assessee made payments after the extended period as per Law and whether the assessee would be entitled for deduction under section 54 as per the aforesaid decisions. Accordingly, set aside the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) as regards claim of exemption under section 54 in respect of Flat Nos.489 and 490 and restore the matter in issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re- decide this issue as per Law, following the decisions of Ms. Jagr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd perused the material on record. 3. In ITA.No.231/Del./2018 assessee challenged the addition of ₹ 34,23,565/- on account of capital gains. The assessing officer noted that the assessee is an individual deriving income from capital gains and income from other sources during the year. As per computation of income filed by the assessee for the A.Y. 2013-14 under appeal, the assessee has claimed an exemption under section 54 of the I.T. Act amounting to ₹ 51,45,226/- on account of investments made out of total long term capital gains earned on sale of Flat for ₹ 75.00 Lacs at 673, Ground Floor, Pocket- E, Mayur Vihar, Phase-II, New Delhi. The assessee has invested entire long term capital gains so earned in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee's claim on payments made towards 3rd Flat No. K-1003 is not allowable under section 54 of the I.T. Act. The assessing officer made calculation of the capital gain accordingly and computed the taxable long term capital gains at ₹ 34,23,565/- and made the addition accordingly. 4. This addition was challenged before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee reiterated the submissions made before the assessing officer. The assessee claimed that the provisions of Section 139(1) includes provisions of Section 139(4) and considering this the date of furnishing the return comes to 31.03.2015 and assessee has paid all the amount before 31.03.2015. The assessee relied upon the Judgment in the case of Nandlal Sharma vs. ITO as rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of CIT, Rohtak vs. Jagtar Singh Chawla [2013] 259 CTR 388 (P H) in which it was held as under : Where assessee paid substantial amount of sale consideration of a residential house for purchase of another residential property within extended period of limitation of filing of return under section 139, his claim for deduction under section 54F was to be allowed. 6.1. Learned Counsel for the Assessee further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has erred in evaluating effect of a residential house with one residential house as given Amendment in Finance Act, 2014 read with Memorandum explaining the budget. The Amendment which was prospective, one can be used to restrict the benefit flowing to the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ording to section 139(4) was March 31, 2007, and, thus, the assessee had complied with the provisions of section 54 of the Act. This order was affirmed by the Tribunal. On appeal: Held, dismissing the appeal, that the sale of the asset had taken place on January 13, 2006, falling in the previous year 2006-07, the return could be filed before the end of the relevant assessment year 2007-08, i.e. March 31, 2007. Thus, sub-section (4) of section 139 provides the extended period of limitation as an exception to sub-section (1) of section 139 of the Act. Sub-section (4) was in relation to the time allowed to an assessee under sub-section (1) to file the return. Therefore, such provision was not an independent provision, but re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the cases of CIT vs. Ms. Jagriti Aggarwal [2011] 339 ITR 610 and CIT vs. Ms. Jagtar Singh Chawla 259 CTR 388 (supra). The Ld. CIT(A) shall verify the investments made by assessee up-to the extended period under Section 139(4) of the Income Tax Act and shall allow the claim of assessee after verification as per Law, by giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8.2. However, as regards the claim of assessee claiming exemption under section 54 in respect of investment made by assessee-company in Flat K-1003, I am of the view that such claim is not allowable in favour of assessee. Even according to the arguments of Learned Counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
