TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as approved by the local authority. The assessee has relied upon various judicial decisions claiming that the contiguous units are to be treated as one residential unit. - Exemption denied - Decided against assessee. - IT Appeal No. 2647 (Mum.) of 2011 - - - Dated:- 31-10-2012 - D. MANMOHAN AND N.K. BILLAIYA, JJ. Sanjiv M. Shah for the Appellant. A.B. Koli for the Respondent. ORDER N.K. Billaiya, Accountant Member - With this appeal the assessee has challenged the correctness of the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-30 Mumbai dt.7.1.2011 pertaining to assessment year 2006-07. 2. The only grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the denial of the exemption u/s. 54F of the Act. 3. Briefly state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stipulated time as per Sec. 54F of the Act as the assessee has complied with investment in new premises, stipulation regarding investment in Capital Gain Deposit Scheme, 1988 before the due date as per Sec. 139(1) has to be construed liberally. (b) Although no agreement was entered with the builder, the assessee has received four allotment letters all dt. 7.10.2005 which clearly establishes the right to purchase the said flats. (c) Out of the four units booked, one flat bearing No. 1001 has been surrendered to the builder with the condition that additional amenities are to be provided for in the remaining flats which condition has been accepted by the developer vide their letter dt. 6.2.2008 and 20.3.2008. 4. The assessee further su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot entitled for deduction u/s. 54F of the Act be it from the law point of view or from the point of view of the case laws relied upon by the assessee and accordingly confirmed the action of the AO. 6. Aggrieved by the finding of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is before us. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities arguing that as per the letter of allotment dt. 7.5.2005, the assessee has booked three flats adjacent to each other and 4th flat on the top floor. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the 4th flat was surrendered and the amount paid for the booking of the 4th flat was appropriated towards amenities to be provided by the builder in respect of three contiguous flats which includ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... between the developer and the assessee. The assessee entered into an agreement for sale on 24.11.2008 which is more than three years from the date of the surrender of the tenancy right. The allotment letter relied upon by the assessee only suggests that there is a proposal and acceptance of something which would come in-existence in future. 9. The assessee has booked flat on the 9th floor of 'C' Wing of the project whereas as per the commencement certificate work upto podium + stilt slab level of Wing A, B C were approved as per noting dt. 28.3.2005, which means that on the date of issue of allotment letter, there was no approval from the Municipal authorities for the construction of the 9th floor. As per the noting dt. 18.3.2008, the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted by the departmental Circular No. 495 dt. 22.9.1987 by which the Board has clarified that the amount has to be deposited before the due date of filing of the return u/s. 139(1) of the Act. The assessee fails on this count also. 10. Coming to the last argument that the three residential flats being adjacent to each other and being contiguous should be treated as one residential unit also cannot be accepted on the basis of the factual matrix discussed hereinabove. As the construction is still under progress and even on the date of hearing when we asked the Counsel about the present status, the Counsel stated that the construction is under progress. Therefore, we fail to understand how the assessee can substantiate his claim that three f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
