Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1990 (3) TMI 15

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... isional Officer, Fort, Cochin, for the construction of the new Dairy Plant at Tripunithura. Advance possession was taken on November 19, 1982, under section l9 of the Act. The transfer took place under that section. The compensation payable for the acquisition was paid to the petitioner in two instalments. An advance payment of Rs. 3,11,065 was made on March 11, 1983 and, out of this, an amount of Rs. 3,10,300 was invested by the petitioner on August 20, 1983, in the National Rural Development Bonds (Second Issue). The award in respect of the land was passed on March 31, 1984 for an amount of Rs. 7,37,215.58 and, after deducting the advance payment, the balance of Rs. 4,26,150.58 was paid to the petitioner on April 30, 1984 and within six m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on the date of such transfer, the period of six months referred to in this sub-section shall, in relation to so much of such compensation as is not received on the date of the transfer, be reckoned from the date immediately following the date on which such compensation is received by the assessee." This amendment took effect from April 1, 1984, and will have effect with effect from 1984-85 normally. Since the petitioner in this case invested the amount within six months of the date of receipt of the compensation in specified securities, the petitioner contended that he is entitled to get the benefit of section 54E of the Act. The Income-tax Officer, by exhibit P-1, denied this benefit on the ground that the date of the transfer is Novemb .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by the proviso, it should be interpreted that this benefit would be available to the petitioner for the year 1984-85 also. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in S. Gopal Reddy v. CIT [1990] 181 ITR 378, held that, under the provisions of section 54E of the Act, what is to be invested in specified assets is "the consideration or any part thereof" and unless the consideration is received, or accrues, there is no question of investing it. The court further held that the second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 54E inserted with effect from April 1, 1984, stating that, in the case of compulsory acquisition of property under a statute, if the full amount of compensation awarded for such acquisition is not received by the assessee on the date .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates