Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 1133 - ITAT DELHIComputation of capital Gain - Cost of acquisition - inclusion of Interest cost - Interest cost was claimed as deduction u/s 24(b) from Income from House Property (self occupied) - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Delhi SMC Bench of the Tribunal in Ashok Kumar Shahi [2019 (11) TMI 85 - ITAT DELHI] in which decision of Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT vs. Shri C. Ramabrahmam [2012 (11) TMI 430 - ITAT CHENNAI] and held deduction under section 24(b) and computation of capital gains under section 48 of the “Act” are altogether covered by different heads of income i.e., income from ‘house property’ and ‘capital gains’. Further, a perusal of both the provisions makes it unambiguous that none of them excludes operative of the other. In other words, a deduction under section 24(b) is claimed when concerned assessee declares income from ‘house property’, whereas, the cost of the same asset is taken into consideration when it is sold and capital gains are computed under section 48. We do not have even a slightest doubt that the interest in question is indeed an expenditure in acquiring the asset. Since both provisions are altogether different, the assessee in the instant case is certainly entitled to include the interest amount at the time of computing capital gains under section 48 - CIT(A) has rightly accepted the assessee’s contention and deleted the addition made by the Assessing officer - Decided against revenue. Deduction u/s 54 on account of acquisition of new residential unit - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the assessee has purchased agricultural land and constructed in the said land residential house, guest house, staff quarters, swimming pool & shed for parking etc. The Ld. CIT(A) has observed and rightly so that the assessee has made investment in the residential house and land appurtenant thereto and that the Act does not limit the size of appurtenant land. As decided in Shri Narendra Mohan Uniyali [2009 (8) TMI 825 - ITAT, DELHI]. It is crystal clear from the plain reading of Section 54 & 54F that exemption is allowable in respect of amount invested in the construction of a residential house. There is no any rider u/s 54F that no deduction would be allowed in respect of investment of capital gains made on acquisition of land appurtenant the building or on the investment on land on which building is being constructed. When the land is purchased and building is constructed thereon, it is not necessary that such construction should be on the entire plot of land, meaning thereby a part of the land which is appurtenant to the building and on which no construction is made, there is no denial of exemption on such investment. The impugned disallowances of exemption under section 54 is not based on any solid foundation and the Ld. CIT(A) was perfectly justified in deleting the disallowance. - Decided against revenue.
|