Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 1089 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s. 54 - Non deposit of the sale consideration in capital gain scheme account prior to due date of filing of return under section 139(1) - investment prior due date of filing of return of income under section 139(4) - investment in new property which was not made within the due date of furnishing return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, but was made within the timelines provided under section 139(4) - scope of due date of filing return under section 139(1) - HELD THAT:- It is a fit case for allowing deduction under section 54F of the Act in the instant set of facts. Various Courts and Tribunals have on numerous occasions held that 54F is a beneficial provision and the same date should be construed liberally. Further, from the plain language of section 54F of the Act, it is seen that only section 139 is mentioned in the context of the unutilised portion of the capital gain on sale of property and therefore investment in new property under section 139 cannot be confined only to provisions of section 139(1) of the Act, but includes all the subsections of section 139 of the Act. In the case of CIT v Rajesh Kumar Jalan [2006 (8) TMI 126 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT] on similar facts held that assessee is eligible for claiming deduction under section 54F of the Act in case of HV investment property section 139(4) of the Act. The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Smt. Harinder Kaur [2021 (2) TMI 580 - ITAT DELHI] held that where assessee paid amount of sale consideration received from sale of a residential house for purchase of another residential property prior to due date of filing of return of income under section 139(4), his claim for exemption under section 54 was to be allowed - Appeal of assessee allowed. Allowability of deduction of renovation and brokerage expenses claimed as deduction by way of cost of improvement from sale of consideration - HELD THAT:- As on the basis of supporting evidences furnished before us, we are of the view that the assessee has been able to substantiate that he had expenses in connection with renovation/brokerage expenses. Accordingly, we are hereby allowing the assessee’s ground of appeal in relation to allowability of renovation and commission expenses by way of deduction as cost of improvement from sale consideration, while computing capital gains tax on sale of property. Assessee appeal allowed.
|