9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntative of the assessee (who appeared before the learned AO), had physically visited the site and had confirmed the aforesaid facts that the alleged house did not even have the basic amenities listed herein above. When there is a physical inspection carried out as late as on 07.12.2017, wherein photographs were also taken of the subject mentioned property, the basic amenities were not available in the subject mentioned property. Thus the assessee had not constructed the residential house within the prescribed time and in fact had not constructed a residential house at all on or before 25.09.2017 which could be construed as a residential house, habitable for its dwelling. Accordingly, deduction u/s 54 of the act had been rightly denied by the learned AO in the instant case. Appeal of the Revenue is allowed. - Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice President And Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv.; And Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. For the Department : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR ORDER PER M. BALAGANESH, AM: The captioned appeal, preferred the Revenue, is directed against the order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appeal. 3. From the perusal of the above grounds we find that the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the assessee would be eligible for claiming deduction u/s 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The return of income for A.Y. 2015-16 was filed by the assessee individual on 31.03.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 1,27,54,600/-. During the year under consideration the assessee sold a property for Rs. 6,88,00,000/-, on which he earned capital gain of Rs. 5,63,74,550/-. The assessee claimed deduction u/s 54 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 5,63,74,550/- in the return of income. The learned AO observed that in the instant case the property that was subject matter of transfer, was a residential property which was sold on 25.09.2014 in favour of Shri Kore for Rs. 6,88,00,000/-. The date of transfer being 25.09.2014, as per the provisions of Section 54 of the Act, the assessee in order to claim deduction u/s 54 of the Act, should have purchased a new residential property on or before 25.09.2016 or should have constructed a new ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shing the requisite details, the Inspector along with Office Superintendent attached to the office of the learned AO was deputed to verify the actual construction carried out in the land situated at village Bandhawari, Sohna, Gurgaon. The Inspector reported that the area was vast uninhabited and comprised of hilly terrain and could not identify the exact location of the land. The Inspector s report is reproduced hereunder: INSPECTOR'S REPORT (in the case of Sandeep Hooda) As directed, I, along with Shri. Tarkeshwarsah, OS went for enquiry of the land at Khewat No. 76, Khatoni No. 76, Village Bandhwari, Sohna, Gurgaon on 25.11.2017. On reaching the village Bandhwari, we met Sarpanch Lakhan (Mobile No. 9891475497) at his residence. On enquiry, he informed us that he was unable to identify the exact location of the land since the area was vast, uninhabited and comprise of hilly terrain. He also had given us the contact number of Patwari named Mr. Sawan (Mobile No. 9991160943), on contacting Mr. Sawan, he informed us that without Kila/Musti number, it is difficult to identify the exact location of the land. T. KHUP SUAN LIAN Inspector ACIT, Circle - 22(2) New Delhi 6. Later, the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the instant case before us. Accordingly, the learned AO denied deduction u/s 54 of the Act in the sum of Rs. 5,63,74,550/-. 8. The learned CIT(A) observed that the house is located in a rural area, where no particular norms for construction are prescribed by the local Authorities and assessee cannot be forced/expected to observe all those norms, which are particularly prescribed by Municipal Authorities for urban housing. He stated that assessee had produced a copy of certificate dated 29.08.2015 issued by the Sarpanch of the village, certifying that the assessee had constructed the house and lived occasionally there on that address. The assessee also produced a copy of the certificate issued by an Architect Shri Avinash Vaidya dated 11.09.2017 certifying that the assessee s house consisted of 2 rooms with toilet, kitchen and garden at the address specified by the assessee. Hence, he held that the assessee had duly invested in the residential property, thereby making him eligible for deduction u/s 54 of the Act. 9. In our considered opinion, the learned AO had ensured that the concerned site where the property is situated had been visited physically by the Inspector and the Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
