Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 155 - ITAT CHENNAIDeduction u/s. 54F - flats to be received in pursuant to JD Agreement - AO denied deduction as assessee has acquired multiple flats in violation of conditions prescribed u/s. 54F and the construction of new residential house property was not completed on or before three years from the date of transfer of original asset - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute with regard to the fact that, the assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 54F of the Act for multiple flats and said claim is in accordance with law, in light of the decisions of various High Courts including Smt. V.R. Karpagam (2014 (8) TMI 899 - MADRAS HIGH COURT). A similar issue has been taken in the case of K.G. Rukminiamma [2010 (8) TMI 482 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] Therefore, we cannot find fault with the claim of the assessee on this ground alone. Construction of house property was not completed within three years from the date of transfer of original asset - We find that the assessee has admitted the fact that the builder did not complete construction of house property on or before three years from the date of transfer of original asset. Therefore, we cannot find fault with the reasons given by the Assessing Officer to reject deduction u/s. 54F on this ground. Assessee has made a new claim before the CIT(A) and sought deduction u/s. 54F in respect of purchase of new residential house property purchased - CIT(A) rejected alternate claim made by the assessee without discussing how such claim cannot be admitted. In the present case, the assessee has purchased a new residential house property on 25.04.2012, which is within two years from the date of transfer of original asset. The assessee has satisfied other conditions because, the new residential house property was purchased on or before due date for filing return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act and thus, she need not to keep sale consideration in capital gains deposit account scheme as per the provisions of section 54F(4) of the Act. Since, the appellant has satisfied all conditions prescribed for claiming deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, in our considered view, the ld. CIT(A) ought to have allowed alternate claim made by the assessee for deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. Thus, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s. 54F of the Act, in respect of residential house property purchased by the assessee on 25.04.2012. Decided in favour of assessee.
|