Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2007 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (3) TMI 283 - AT - Income TaxEligibility to deduction u/s. 54F - belated investment - HELD THAT:- Section 54(2) was substituted by the Finance Act, 1987. The scope and effect of amendments were elaborated vide Circular No. 495. Sections 54(2) and 54F(4) were introduced to dispense with rectification of assessments in case the taxpayer fails to acquire the corresponding new asset. Hence, if the new asset is acquired before the date of filing of the return u/s 139 then the assessee can file such return and there will be no need of rectification. Thus, the interpretation, which has been placed by the learned Gauhati High Court in the case of CIT v. Rajesh Kumar Jalan [2006 (8) TMI 126 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT], is in accordance with the legislation intent of introducing sections 54(2) and 54F(4). It is true that the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Taranbir Singh Sawhney v. Dy. CIT [2005 (9) TMI 508 - ITAT DELHI] did not allow the deduction u/s 54F though the new asset was acquired on 1-12-1997 but the amount of capital gain was not deposited in the capital gain account by 30-6-1997 i.e., the due date of filing the return. However, the decision of the learned Gauhati High Court was not available to the learned Delhi Bench. We follow the decision of the Gauhati High Court and hold that the assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 54F of the Income-tax Act. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
|