Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 1137 - ITAT DELHIExemption u/s 54F - whether really the assessee invested the amount in purchase of the property before the expiry of the period prescribed under section 54F ? - HELD THAT:- Agreement dated 30.3.2012and the sale deed dated 9.7.2015 do not rule out the possibility of the parties bringing such documents into existence as a result of an afterthought, the doubt rightly entertained by the authorities below. Doubt entertained by the authorities below is well corroborated by the conduct of the parties themselves, inasmuch as neither the sale of plot nor the purchase of flat is declared by the assessee either in her capital gains or by way of claiming exemption under section 54F. So also, there is no denial of the fact recorded by the learned Assessing Officer that the examination of the income tax return filed by Smt. Jaspreet Kaur established that she had not declared any capital gains under the head “capital gains” either longterm or short-term and also, she has not shown any income derived from the business or profession, if at all it has to be taken that Smt. Jaspreet Kaur carried on any business as a builder as claimed by the assessee. The statement of the assessee is not supported by her conduct.In this set of facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to believe the genuineness of the agreement to sell dated 30.3.2012. If this agreement is taken out of consideration, there is nothing on record to suggest that at any time prior to 9.7.2015, the assessee invested the amount for purchase of the residential house or that she had taken possession thereof within the time stipulated for the purpose of investment under law. It is unsafe to place reliance on the agreement of sale dated 30.3.2012 to hold that as on such date there was a transaction of purchase of the entire ground floor of the property or that any amount was paid under such an instrument on that day, but only because the basic structure of the building was not complete as on the date, possession was taken subsequent to the expiry of the period of 3 years when the sale deed dated 9.7.2015 was executed. With this view of the matter, we do not find anything illegal in the conclusions reached by the authorities below. - Decided against assessee.
|