9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T] and case of Shri Jaswinder Singh Lota [ 2018 (3) TMI 1942 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] . Peculiar facts of the present case the claim of the assessee has to be allowed. It is seen that the amendment by the Finance Act of 2014 in section 54F comes into effect only from 01/04/2015. Thus, from the said date the benefit of deduction under section 54F for investments made outside India undisputedly can be denied as it can be said to be limited to the investment in residential house property made only within India. However, prior to the said date when the amendment kicks in, there is no statutory bar for the taxpayer to make investments outside India in residential house property in order to get the benefit of deductions 54F provided other condi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The assessee challenged the action of the AO in making addition of ₹ 4,72,98,280/- before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) after hearing the assessee partly allowed the appeal of and restricted the deduction to 50% of the investment made in residential property amounting to ₹ 6,36,64,000/-. Against the said findings of the ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The Revenue has challenged the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law by holding that claim of the assessee to get the benefit of deduction/s 54 for investment outside India be allowed. 2. On the facts an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased on the provisions of law and in accordance with the judgement of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Leena Jugal Kishore Shah Vs ACIT 392 ITR 0018 (Guj.) and the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Jaswinder Singh Lota Vs DCIT, ITA No. 802/Chd/2015 AY 2008-09, there is no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) to interfere with the same. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and perused the material on record including the cases relied upon by the ld. counsel. The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the deductions u/s. 54 of the Act basically holding that the amended provisions have no retrospective application as the claim of the assessee pertains to the assessment year 2013-14, whereas, the amendme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the present case the claim of the assessee has to be allowed. It is seen that the amendment by the Finance Act of 2014 in section 54F comes into effect only from 01/04/2015. Thus, from the said date the benefit of deduction under section 54F for investments made outside India undisputedly can be denied as it can be said to be limited to the investment in residential house property made only within India. However, prior to the said date when the amendment kicks in, there is no statutory bar for the taxpayer to make investments outside India in residential house property in order to get the benefit of deductions 54F provided other conditions were fulfilled. Thus, since the assessment year under consideration is prior to the amendment of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
