9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1778X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer assessing the income of the assessee at Rs. 2,41,21,150/- instead of Rs. 66,10,765/- as declared by the appellant in his return of income. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred facts and in law by confirmation of denial of deduction u/s.54 amounting to Rs. 1,74,03,119/- of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as rightfully claimed by the appellant on making substantial payment out of capital gains towards acquisition of residential house property." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 25.12.2010 declaring total income to the tune of Rs. 66,10,765/-. The assessee was employed with Juniper Hotels Pvt. Ltd. from 01.04.2009 to 31.05.2009 and Robust Hotels Pvt. Ltd, from 01.04.200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the income of the assessee. Feeling aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who confirmed the said order, hence the assessee has filed the present appeal before us. ISSUE NO.1 & 2:- 4. Issue no.1 and 2 are interconnected, therefore, are being taken up together for adjudication. Infact both the issues are in connection with the plea of the assessee that the Assessing Officer has wrongly disallowed the Long Term Capital Gain to the tune of Rs. 1,74,03,119/- as not exempted u/s.54 of the Act. The representative of the assessee has argued that the assessee sold the flat at Bandra, Mumbai for a sum of Rs. 4,30,00,000/- and received the capital gain to the tune of Rs. 1,74,03,119/-. The assessee purchased an another flat at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... new assets. The allotment letter dated 08.02.2010 and the agreement dated 30.07.2010 and payment on 30.07.2010 are also not in dispute. However the said agreement speaks about the tentative date of possession on 30.06.2013 which falls outside the specified period of 3 years. The construction of the flat still continues and incompleted because floor, electrical fitting etc. are yet to be completed. The object of enacting section 54 of the Act is to encourage the investment in residential building whether completed or not and this controversy has been adjudicated in case [2012] 19 taxmann.com 17 (Kar.), Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in case titled as Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. SambandamUdaykumar and in case of the Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
