9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 821X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat are to be decided by this Tribunal are as under:- a) Whether the sale consideration of Rs. 37,92,600/- on sale of land should be considered as against the actual sale consideration received in the sale of Rs. 19,85,000/- for the purpose of computation of capital gains in the facts and circumstances of the case. b) Whether the assessee is entitled for claiming cost of development of Rs. 5 lakhs while computing the capital gains in the facts and circumstances of the case. c) Whether the assessee is entitled for claim of exemption under Section.54F of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the assessee had sold 76 cents of land at Tharan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e receipt for payment of Rs. 5 akhs from Shri C.Vasudevan to substantiate her claim. The Ld. A.O disbelieved the same and further observed that the PAN and address of Shri C.Vasudevan was not produced before him to check the correctness of claim made by the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer denied the benefit of grant of deduction of cost of improvement at Rs. 5 lakhs while computing the capital gains. This action was upheld by the learned CIT(A). 4. Before us, the Ld. A.R. argued that without incurring of development cost on the said land, the sale of land could not have happened. Hence, Ld. A.R. vehemently pleaded that assessee be given a deduction towards cost of improvement of Rs. 5 lakhs while computing the capital gains, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of C.I.T Vs. V.Natarajan reported in 287 ITR 271 (Mad.), which has been heavily relied upon by Ld. A.R. before us, had held as under:- "Ïn the instant case, the assessee purchased a house property at Anna Nagar in the name of his wife Smt.Meera after selling a property at Bangalore, but the same was assessed in the hands of the assessee. Hence, as correctly held by the learned CIT(A) as well as by the Tribunal, the assessee is entitled for exemption under Section.54F of the Act. Respectfully following the afore said decision, we hold that even though the new property has been invested in the name of assessee's husband, exemption under Section.54F cannot be denied to the assessee. We direct the A.O. accordingly. The grounds rais ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
