9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e requirement and the spirit of the provision. When the person who claimed exemption or concession he has to establish that he is entitled to that exemption or concession. A provision providing for an exemption, concession or exception, as the case may be, has to be construed strictly with certain exceptions depending upon the settings on which the provision has been placed in the Statute and the object and purpose to be achieved. Plain reading of Section 54B would show that the benefit is available to the assessee and when the exemption is demanded. In absence of any ambiguity the scope of definition of assessee cannot be enlarged so as to include the wife of the assessee. In other words, the exemption clause has to be construed strictly. Applying the well settled principles of law and for the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the ITAT was justified in holding that the deduction under Section 54B of the IT Act cannot be allowed to the assessee as the land was not purchased in his own name. Decided against assessee. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOUTAM BHADURI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR TIWARI For the Appellant Mr. M.C. Jain Mr. V.S. Mishra, Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und that the exemption could have been allowed only if the investment is made by the assessee in his own name and since the investment was made in the name of wife, son, father, etc. did not allow the deduction of ₹ 9,90,300/- and ₹ 8,62,600/- under Section 54B and set aside the order of the CIT (A) and restored back the order of the Assessing Officer on this point. The same was subject of challenge before this Court. This Court admitted the appeal on the substantial question of law, as quoted supra. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the ITAT misdirected itself to interpret Section 54B of the IT Act. He would further submit that language of Sections 54, 54B and 54F of the IT Act are pari materia and as per the law laid down by the Delhi High Court in the matter of Commissioner of Income Tax- XII v Shri Kamal Wahal ITA-4/2013 (dated 11-1-2013) when the property was purchased in the name of wife the deduction was allowed. He would also submit that since the Supreme Court in the matter of The Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal I, Calcutta v M/s Vegetables Products Ltd. 88-ITR-192 (SC) has laid down that when there is more than ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in the matter of Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v Shri Dinesh Verma ITA No.381 of 2014 (O M) (decided on 6-7-2015) and the decision rendered by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, in the matter of Shri Kalya v The Commissioner of Income Tax Others ITA No.112 of 2012 (decided on 19-5-2012). 7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents. 8. The relevant facts are that the appellant sold his agricultural land on 2-7-2010 to M/s Golden Bricks Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The sale consideration was shown as ₹ 45.80 lacs and the cash amounting to ₹ 30.00 lacs deposited in the bank account of the appellant, therefore, initially the Long Term Capital Gain was assessed for a consideration of ₹ 75.80 lacs, however, subsequently, the assessee made a statement that due to improper state of mind being brain tumor patient, he ended up giving incorrect statement inadvertently and ₹ 30.00 lacs was received as cash gift from his father-in-law. This statement led to enquiry and on enquiry it was found that the father-in-law of the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was being used by the assessee being an individual or his parent, or a Hindu undivided family for agricultural purposes (hereinafter referred to as the original asset), and the assessee has, within a period of two years after that date, purchased any other land for being used for agricultural purposes, then, instead of the capital gain being charged to income-tax as income of the previous year in which the transfer took place, it shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say, (i) if the amount of the capital gain is greater than the cost of the land so purchased (hereinafter referred to as the new asset), the difference between the amount of the capital gain and the cost of the new asset shall be charged under section 45 as the income of the previous year; and for the purpose of computing in respect of the new asset any capital gain arising from its transfer within a period of three years of its purchase, the cost shall be nil; or (ii) if the amount of the capital gain is equal to or less than the cost of the new asset, the capital gain shall not be charged under section 45; and for the purpose of computing in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Act; (c) every person who is deemed to be an assessee in default under any provision of this Act; 14. In order to interpret whether the reinvestment made by the assessee i.e. two properties purchased by him in the name of his wife he would be entitled to exemption, it will be apt to refer the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilisers Limited v Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax and Others 1992 Supp (1) SCC 21 wherein it has been observed that the choice between a strict and a liberal construction arises only in case of doubt in regard to the intention of the legislature manifest on the statutory language. The Supreme Court held that as para 24 : 24 ...The choice between a strict and a liberal construction arises only in case of doubt in regard to the intention of the Legislature manifest on the statutory language. Indeed, the need to resort to any interpretative process arises only where the meaning is not manifest on the plain words of the statute. If the words are plain and clear and directly convey the meaning, there is no need for any interpretation. It appears to us the true rule of construction of a pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ute: (i) In interpreting a taxing statute, equitable considerations are entirely out of place. A taxing statute cannot be interpreted on any presumption or assumption. A taxing statute has to be interpreted in the light of what is clearly expressed; it cannot imply anything which is not expressed; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any deficiency; (ii) Before taxing any person, it must be shown that he falls within the ambit of the charging section by clear words used in the section; and (iii) If the words are ambiguous and open to two interpretations, the benefit of interpretation is given to the subject and there is nothing unjust in a taxpayer escaping if the letter of the law fails to catch him on account of Legislature s failure to express itself clearly . 35. Now coming to the other aspect, as we presently discuss, even with regard to exemption clauses or exemption notifications issued under a taxing statute, this Court in some cases has taken the view that the ambiguity in an exemption notification should be construed in favour of the subject. In subsequent cases, this Court diluted the principle saying that mandatory requirem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
