Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 1263 - ITAT AHMEDABADCapital gain computation - cost of acquisition of the asset sold as on 01.04.1981 - AO’s action in referring valuation issue of the very capital asset in question as not sustainable u/s.55A - Held that:- The very cost of acquisition of the capital asset in question as on 01.04.1981 has to be adopted in all co-owners’ cases instead of the particular appellant hereinabove. We can’t adopt different cost of acquisition qua the very capital asset. We thus follow the same reasoning herein as well to delete the impugned long term gain addition. All these assessees accordingly succeed in their first common substantive ground. Seeking to claim Section 54F deduction - CIT(A) observes that since the latter two assessees have reinvested their sale consideration money / long term capital gains in the names of their mother and brother, they are not entitled to claim the said deduction on this score alone - Held that:- We reiterate the Section 54F of the Act is in the nature of a deduction provision in a taxing statute to be liberally constitute. There is no such stipulation that the said re-investment of sale consideration/long term capital gains in question is to be made only in the names of vendor assessees. Both the parties are very fair in forming the bench that the hon’ble jurisdictional high court has not adjudicated the impugned issue. We thus quote decisions of CIT vs. Kamal Wahal [2013 (1) TMI 401 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] and CIT vs. Ravinder Kumar Arora (2011 (9) TMI 343 - DELHI HIGH COURT) to conclude that the above deduction provision neither provides for purchase of new residential house either in the concerned assessee’s own name or exclusively in his name. The latter two assessees’ deduction claim u/s.54F of the Act is accordingly held allowable. Their corresponding substantive ground stands accepted.
|