9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 564X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me from House Property. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(Appeals)-II erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,83,345/- on account of Long term Capital Gain and not extending the benefit of exemptions as envisaged in law.' Grounds 1 and 2 are general in nature, warranting no adjudication, the same are accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. 3. The facts in relation to ground #3 are that the assessee was denied deduction to the extent of Rs. 4,112/-, being interest on a housing loan, in the computation of his income u/s.22 of the Act, i.e., under the head of income 'income from house property'. The ld. Authorized Representative (A.R.), during hearing, would take us through the interest certificate issued by the concerned bank, which clearly reflects the assessee's name as among the names of the borrowers and, in fact, in the first place (PB pg. 5), i.e., along with that of his spouse as the second borrower. Further, in first appeal, the ld. CIT(A) specifically asked the assessee if his case was that the investment in the house was made by him in the name of his wife, and to which he categorically denied. We see no reason for the disallowance in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out with any cogent or reliable evidence. Toward this, we observe the principal evidence led by the assessee as the undated certificate from the said 'Munna Furniture Makers' (PB pg. 15). It, however, does not specify the nature of the work carried out, nor does the assessee, so that the same remains unspecified. Even if therefore payments were made to the said concern, there is nothing to show that the same were actually in the nature of renovation work, so as to qualify for being considered as toward improvement. If, for example, some furniture was got fabricated, the same may not qualify as an improvement to the residential house, for which it shall have to be shown that the said furniture forms an integral part of the house/structure. The letter head, on which the certificate stands issued, describes the said concern as 'interior decorators', so that it may be that some interior designing work was carried out by the said firm, which may again not necessarily be in the nature of an addition or improvement to the existing house. Any addition and/or alteration to the house, enhancing its functional utility, so as to qualify as an improvement, would also require being notified to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e acquisition of the new residential house by the assessee or by way of deposit in the account (with a scheduled bank or specified institution), could be by the time limit specified for furnishing a return of income u/s. 139(4). The said decisions would not be of any assistance to the assessee in the undisputed facts of the case. This is as the primary condition of the purchase of a house within a year before, or within two years after, the date of transfer, or its construction within three years thereof, is not satisfied. There is no ambiguity about the time limit specified for the two modes of acquisition envisaged by the provision. The first appellate authority has given a categorical finding of the construction of the Noida flat being not complete by 15.01.2012, and which finding remains unrebutted or uncontroverted. The next decision relied upon is in the case of Sanjeev Lal vs. CIT (in C.A.Nos. 5899-5900 of 2014) by the hon'ble P&H High Court (copy on record). In the facts of that case, the assessee purchased a new flat on 30.04.2003, while transferring his residential house (original asset) on 24.09.2004. The purchase of the new asset being more than one year prior to the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion stands satisfied, i.e., its non-satisfaction is not in issue. Further still, even going by the assessee's stand, it is only the sum deposited in the capital gains scheme account (which is admittedly not opened in the instant case) or otherwise utilized toward the acquisition of the new residential house by the extended date of furnishing the return of income u/s. 139(4), that would qualify for being considered as toward the cost of the new asset, with reference to which the capital gain stands to be excepted from being brought to tax on account of investment or deemed investment therein. It is only this amount which in any case of the matter could be considered as being subject to exemption from tax on capital gains. Due regard is to be made for the scheme of the Act, or even the relevant provision/s, even as explained by the apex court in Bhavnagar University vs. Palitana Sugar Mill Pvt. Ltd. [2003] 2 SCC 111, relied upon, extracting a part (paras 24 & 25) thereof in Rajesh Kumar Jalan (supra). We may though clarify that this is stated in addition and without prejudice to our principal objection of the assessee being not eligible for deduction u/s.54 in view of the non-satisf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
