9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... When discordant views are rendered by different High Courts, an inferior authority under one of such High Courts, is bound to follow its jurisdictional High Court notwithstanding that other view of the non-jurisdictional High Court may sound more appealing on individual level vis-a-vis the view of the jurisdictional High Court. The principle of following a view in favour of the assessee when contrary views are available, applies to the authorities acting under a neutral High Court, namely, which has not expressed any opinion for or against - on that point. Once the jurisdictional High Court decides a particular issue in a particular manner, that manner has to be mandatorily followed by all the authorities acting under it so long as it hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in purchase of agricultural lands even though the same was in the name of her sons. The Assessing Officer (AO) came to hold that the condition precedent for claiming exemption u/s 54B of the Act was that the new property should be purchased in the name of the assessee only. Relying on the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prakash Vs. ITO and Others (2009) 312 ITR 40 (Bom), the AO held that exemption u/s 54B could not be allowed because the property was not purchased in the name of assessee. The ld. CIT(A) affirmed the action of the AO. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. At the outset, it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Courts also. 6. On the contrary, the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in Prakash Vs. ITO and others (supra) has disentitled the assessee to the claim of exemption when a new property is not purchased in the name of assessee, who transferred the original property. The Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in a later decision in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Verma (2015) 233 Taxman 409 (P H) considered a case in which the new property was not purchased in the name of the assessee who transferred the original property. The Hon ble High Court did not grant the benefit of exemption u/s 54B to that extent. 7. Ergo, it is overt that the decisions have been rendered at variance by the two sets of the Hon ble High Courts one in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
