Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 264 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s.54EC - LTCG - AO submitted that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in allowing the exemption of ₹ 1 crore as there is an amendment in the Act, whereby the limit of investment is restricted to the extent of ₹ 50 lacs - Held that:- If the assessee is able to keep the six months’ limit from the date of transfer of capital asset, but, still able to place investment of ₹ 50 lakhs each in two different financial years, we cannot say that the restrictive proviso will limit the claim to ₹ 50 lakhs only. Since assessee here had placed ₹ 50 lakhs in two different financial years but within six months period from the date of transfer of capital assets, assessee was definitely eligible to claim exemption upto ₹ 1 Crore. The same view has been taken by Ahmedabad Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Aspi Ginwala & Others (2012 (4) TMI 195 - ITAT AHMEDABAD ). We are, therefore, of the opinion that the assessee has to succeed in this appeal. Claim of the assessee for exemption upto ₹ 1 Crore has to be allowed in accordance with Section 54EC of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction of ₹ 81,48,754/- from LTCG and of ₹ 18,51,246/- from the STCG and tax the balance LTCG of ₹ 23,97,146/- and STCG of ₹ 5,44,587/- - Held that:- Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Polestar Industries(2013 (11) TMI 910 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ), this ground of Revenue’s appeal is rejected. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of expenditure - CIT(A) allowed claim - Held that:- Heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has given a detailed finding on fact in his order. The finding of the ld.CIT(A) has not been controverted by the ld.Sr.DR by placing any contrary material on record, therefore we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A) - Decided in favour of assessee.
|