Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 1604 - ITAT MUMBAIDeduction u/s 54F - house purchased outside India - investment of capital gain in purchase of new residential house in Australia and thus allowing the shifting of tax base of India to a foreign country - whether provisions of Income-tax Act extends to India only and not extra territorial? - scope of amendment - HELD THAT:- As decided in LEENA JUGALKISHOR SHAH VERSUS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. [2016 (12) TMI 351 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] The assessee invested the capital gains in a residential house within the stipulated time. There was no condition in section 54F of Act at the relevant time that the capital gains arising out of transfer of capital asset should be invested in a residential house situated in India. The language of section 54F of the Act before its amendment was that the assessee should invest capital gains in a residential house. It was only after the amendment to section 54F of the Act by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014, which came into force with effect from April 1, 2015 that the assesses should invest the sale proceeds arising out of sale of capital asset in a residential house situated in India within the stipulated period. When section 54F was clear and unambiguous, there was no scope for importing into the statute words which were not there. As in the instant case, as the assessee has invested capital gains in purchase of residential house prior to amendment to section 54F of the Act by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014, which came into force w.e.f. April 01, 2015, the exemption is allowable. - Decided in favour of assessee Assessee has not deposited the safe consideration amount in the capital gains bank account - due date for furnishing the return of income according to section 139(1) - HELD THAT:- In Humayun Suleman Merchant [2016 (9) TMI 70 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] it has been held that where the amounts of capital gains is utilized before filing the return of income in purchase/construction of a residential house, then the benefit of exemption u/s 54F is available. Also in K. RAMACHANDRA RAO [2015 (4) TMI 620 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] held assessee having invested entire sale consideration in construction of a residential house within three years from the date of transfer, he could not be denied exemption u/s 54F on the ground that he did not deposit said amount in capital gains accounts scheme before due date prescribed u/s 139(1). In the instant case, the assessee filed her return of income for the impugned assessment year on 20.06.2011 declaring the total income of ₹ 6,90,42,239/-. Subsequently, she revised her return of income on 24.07.2012 at a total income of ₹ 3,37,72,410/-. In the revised return of income, the assessee claimed exemption u/s 54 of the Act. As per the details filed in the Paper Book (P/B) at page 10, the assessee remitted an amount of ₹ 9,00,000/- to Australia on 4th March 2011 and further remitted ₹ 2,90,00,000/- on 11 August 2011 and also remitted ₹ 2 crore on 4th June 2012 from her Standard Chartered Bank Account. - Decided in favour of assessee. Capital gain computation - Indexation year of cost of acquisition to be 1981-82 - house property at Chennai was inherited by the assesses on 10.06.2001 i.e. only after her mother's expiry - HELD THAT:- As decided in MANJULA J. SHAH [2011 (10) TMI 406 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] by applying the deeming provisions contained in Explanation 1(i)(b) to section 2(42A) the assessee was deemed to have held the asset from January 29, 1993, to June 30, 2003, by including the period for which the asset was held by the previous owner and, accordingly, held liable for long-term capital gains tax. While computing the capital gains, the indexed cost of acquisition had to be computed with reference to the year in which the previous owner first held the asset and not the year in which the assessee became the owner of the asset. - Revenue appeal dismissed.
|