2023 (3) TMI 1551 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 54F - denial of claim for not constructing the building within the due date as prescribed by the section 54F - HELD THAT - In the case on hand the assessee has invested the entire amounts before filing of the return of income as mandated in sec.54F has claimed exemption u/s 54F. On perusal of the documents filed by the assessee we observed that the assessee had genuine reason for not constructing the building within the due date as prescribed by the section 54F but the intention of the assessee was to construct of the residential house building. As construction cannot be considered as the assessee has constructed a house property at plot No. 197 as observed by the AO. Accordingly the assessee is eligible for the proportionate deduction as per section 54F since the entire sale proceeds were not used for the new assets. Since the purchase of property from BDA is subjudice with the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka and the assessee could not show us the status of the case before the Hon ble High Court. If in case the assessee gets refund from the BDA in such case the assessee will be liable for capital gain tax as per law. Accordingly we direct to AO to compute the capital gain in above terms. Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of Capital Gain Exemption under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Compliance with conditions for claiming exemption under Section 54F, including construction of a residential house and deposit of unutilized capital gains.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Capital Gain Exemption under Section 54F:
The primary issue in the appeal was the disallowance of the capital gain exemption claimed by the assessee under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee sold a plot of land and declared a long-term capital gain of Rs. 1,86,63,291/-. To claim exemption from this capital gain, the assessee invested in purchasing two residential plots and commenced construction on one of them. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the exemption on the grounds that the construction was not completed within the stipulated three-year period and the unutilized amount was not deposited in the Capital Gains Account Scheme (CGAS-88) before filing the return of income. The AO concluded that the assessee failed to fulfill the conditions required under Section 54F, thus bringing the capital gain to tax.

2. Compliance with Conditions for Claiming Exemption under Section 54F:
The assessee argued that the intention was to construct a residential house, but due to a legal dispute regarding land acquisition by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), construction was obstructed. The High Court of Karnataka had ordered a status quo on the land, which prevented the completion of construction. The assessee claimed that the entire sale consideration was invested in purchasing the plots and initial construction efforts, thus fulfilling the intention of Section 54F. The assessee cited several judicial precedents where courts have allowed exemptions under similar circumstances where external factors prevented timely construction.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) considered these arguments and the judicial precedents presented. The Tribunal acknowledged the genuine intention of the assessee to construct a residential house and the external legal impediments that delayed construction. It was noted that the assessee had invested the sale proceeds in acquiring residential plots and initiated construction, albeit incomplete. The Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to a proportionate deduction under Section 54F for the amount invested in acquiring the plots, as the intention to construct was evident, and the delay was beyond the assessee's control.

The Tribunal directed the AO to compute the capital gains accordingly, allowing a proportionate deduction for the investment made in the residential plots. The decision emphasized that the law does not require performance of an impossible duty, and the assessee's inability to complete construction due to legal disputes should not deprive them of the exemption benefits intended by the statute.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed, granting the assessee a proportionate deduction under Section 54F for the investment made in purchasing the residential plots, while acknowledging the external factors that delayed construction. The Tribunal's decision underscored the importance of considering genuine intent and uncontrollable circumstances in tax exemption claims.