Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (10) TMI 581 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - claim of deduction under Section 54F - Held that:- The Hon'ble High Court in the case of Prin. CIT Vs. C. Gopalaswamy (2016 (6) TMI 643 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT) has held that the condition precedent for claiming benefit under Section 54/54F is that capital gain realize from capital asset should have been invested either in purchase of residential house or in constructing the residential house. If after making the entire payment merely a registered sale deed has not been executed and registered in favour of the assessee before the period stipulated he cannot be denied the benefit under Section 54F of the Act. Similarly if he has invested the money in construction of residential house then merely the construction was not completed in all respects and it was not in fit condition to occupy within the period prescribed under Section 54F of the Act the benefit u/s.54/54F cannot be claimed. Once it is demonstrated that the consideration received on transfer of the asset has been invested either in purchasing a residential house or in construction of residential house even though the transactions are not complete in all respects as required under the law that would not disentitle the assessee from benefit. The assessee has established a prima facie case of claim of deduction under Section 54F. Therefore when the CIT has not afforded an effective opportunity of hearing and the Assessing Officer has not conducted a proper enquiry, then in the facts and circumstances of the case we set aside the impugned revision order passed under Section 263 and remit the matter to the record of the Assessing Officer for considering the relevant record in support of the claim that the assessee has finally constructed the residential house. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|