Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (5) TMI 337 - AT - Income TaxDeduction claimed u/s.54F - investment in question should have been made, in terms of the provisions of section 54F within one year before the sale of property or two years after sale of property and this condition, according to the Assessing Officer, was not satisfied, and, accordingly, deduction under section 54F was inadmissible - HELD THAT:- We find that the issue in appeal is squarely covered in the case of CIT vs Beena K Jain [1993 (11) TMI 7 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein held the new residential house had been purchased by the assessee within two years after the sale of the capital asset which resulted in long-term capital gains. The Tribunal has held that the relevant date in this connection is July 29, 1988, when the petitioner paid the full consideration amount on the flat becoming ready for occupation and obtained possession of the flat. This has been taken by the Tribunal as the date of purchase. The Tribunal has looked at the substance of the transaction and come to the conclusion that the purchase was substantially effected when the agreement of purchase was carried out or completed by payment of full consideration on July 29, 1988, and handing over of possession of the flat on the next day. Clearly, therefore, the date relevant for determining the purchase of property is the date on which full consideration is paid and possession is taken. There is no dispute that this date is 22.07.2015 which falls within a period of two years from the date on which related property is sold. The Assessing officer has, however, proceeded to adopt the date on which initial payment of ₹ 1,00,00,000/- is made. The approach so adopted by the Assessing Officer is ex facie incorrect and contrary to law and down by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Beena K Jain (Supra). - Decided against revenue.
|