Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 447 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of claim made by the assessee u/s 54F - Held that:- As per sec. 54F, if the cost of the new asset is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, the whole of such capital gain shall not be charged u/s 45 of the Act. Similarly, the requirement is to purchase new asset before one year or after two years of the date on which the transfer took place. In this case, the fact that the assessee has purchased the new asset within the stipulated time period under the act was not disputed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee relied on the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of R. Srinivasan (2010 (4) TMI 1128 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) and other Hon’ble Courts which support the assessee’s contention. The issue regarding whether the investment in a capital asset is required to be sourced from the capital gain or not has been considered by the Hon'ble P&H High Court in the case of Kapil Kumar Agarwal (2015 (12) TMI 1075 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT ) relied upon by the assessee. The High Court has held that sec. 54F nowhere envisages that the sale consideration received by the assessee from the original capital asset mandatorily should to be utilized for the purchase or construction of the new house property. The simple requirement is to invest in an asset within the stipulated time. In this case, the assessee has invested within the stipulated time. Therefore, we hold that the assessee is entitled for the deduction u/s 54F of the Act.- Decided in favour of assessee
|