9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 854X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... necessary petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit explaining reasons for delay has been filed. The AR further submitted that the assessee could not file appeal within the time allowed under the Act, mainly due to lockdown imposed by the Govt. on account of spread of Covid-19 infections and in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court suomotu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, if the period of delay is covered within the period specified in the order of the Apex Court , then same needs to be condoned in view of specific problem faced by the public on account of Covid-19 pandemic. 3. The learned DR, on the other hand, fairly agreed that delay may be condoned in the interest of justice. 4. Having heard both sides and considered reasons given by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to the appellant, although there was no reason to believe for her to issue notice to the appellant and thus the notice issued is without jurisdiction. 5. The 'appellant' craves leave to add, alter or vary the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 6. On the above grounds and on other grounds that may be submitted at the time of hearing it is prayed that the addition of Rs. 16,77,574 in the income may please be deleted." 6. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, did not file her return of income for the assessment year 2011-12. As per information available with the department, it was noticed that the assessee had made huge cash deposits into her bank account. Therefore, assessment has been reop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decisions, including the decision of co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT., Chennai, in the case of D.Devadoss Vs. ITO in ITA No. 246/Mds/2015 dated 07.04.2016 rejected arguments of the assessee and sustained additions made by the Assessing Officer towards disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.54 of the Act, by holding that investments made in the name of married daughter cannot be considered as investments made for the purpose of claiming deduction u/s.54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the learned CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. The learned A.R for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) not justified in sustaining addition of Rs. 16,77,574/- by disallowing deduction claimed under section 54 of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Tax Act, 1961 and therefore, their orders should be upheld. 10. We have heard both the parties, perused material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. As per provisions of section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee can claim benefit of deduction, in case, sale consideration received from transfer of original asset was invested in purchase of another residential house property. As per plain reading of section 54 of the Act, it is very clear that investment should be made in the name of the assessee to get benefit of deduction. However, various courts, including the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. V.Natarajan (supra) had taken a lenient view considering beneficial provisions of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
