9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, and another addition of Rs. 2,94,843/- on account of interest on re-fund of the equal amount, the Assessing Officer assessed total income of the assessee at Rs. 2,14,93,310/- by recomputing his income as under:- "6. With the above remarks, the income of the assessee is re-computed as under:- Income from Salary as declared Rs. 27, 00,000/- Income from House Property as declared Rs. 9, 99,052/- Income from capital gain as declared as declared Rs. 1, 15, 36,383/- Add: Deduction u/s 54F as withdrawn as per Rs. 63, 66,234/- Para 4 above Income from other sources as declared Rs. 2, 53,207/- Add: Addition as per para 5 above Rs. 2, 94,843/- Total Rs. 2, 16, 43,305/- Less: Deduction under ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice. In para 4.1 of the assessment order, relevant portion of the reply reads as under:- "That the above land and building was given on rent to State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur which runs its branch at the above mentioned premises i.e. B-94, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur. A copy of registered lease deed i.e. Rent deed dated 21.4.2009 executed by State Bank of Bikaner Jaipur in favour of assessee Jai Singh Sethia is enclosed. This lease deed itself clearly suggest that the property at B-94, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur commercial in Nature. The assessee is regularly filing his return of income from last more than 40 years and is regularly showing income from rent from this property rented to SBBJ as per the enclosed rent deed. Until sale of the property in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid that the property was residential in nature. Admittedly, the user of the property was never converted by any permission from the competent authority. It is also admitted that in the return of income, the assessee had shown income from rent under the head "Income from House Property". 12 Having regard to the provisions of section 54F of the Act and the property sold by the assessee in the year under consideration being a residential property, the lower authorities were correct in arriving at the conclusion that provisions of section 54F of the Act do not come into application in this case. 13. In the alternative, the only contention raised by Learned AR for the appellant is that in case the appellant is not entitled to benefit of pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... But, we observe that the conditions as prescribed in sections 54 and 54F of the Act are similar, except that in section 54 of the Act condition prescribed is w.r.t. investment of capital gain only and whereas in section 54F of the Act it is investment of net consideration, that way rather by choosing exemption u/s. 54F of the Act, the assessee taken a higher burden of investment. It is observed that the fact that the assessee complied with the provisions of section 54F of the Act is nowhere under challenge, hence there is no need to refer the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT (A). Moreover, the first appellate authority was under legal obligation to decide the alternate ground taken by the assessee (Who is fulfilling all the conditions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
