TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with judicial decisions. Considering the factual aspects, genuiness of the transactions and beneficial aspects of the provisions, we are of the opinion that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has rightly construed the findings and the explanation of the assessee with observation in his order and allowed the deduction u/s.54F of the Act - Decided against revenue - I.T.A. No.415/Mds/2015 & C.O.No.43/Mds/2015 - - - Dated:- 22-4-2016 - SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT For The Respondent : Shri.N. Quadir Hoseyn, Adv ORDER PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection by the assessee are directed against common order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-VI, Chennai for the assessment year 2005-06 in ITA No.709/13-14/A-VI, dt 30.10.2014 passed u/s.143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as the Act ). 2. There is a delay of 47 days in filing the appeal by the Department. At the time of hearing the ld. Departmental Representative has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax (Appeals). 4. In the appellate proceedings, the ld. Authorised Representative reiterated the submissions made in assessment proceedings and challenged the validity of reopening of assessment as reopening was based on Audit objection and alleged the order of reassessment is bad in law. The ld. Authorised Representative further argued that the Assessing Officer is not correct in observing that the assessee has not invested the net consideration in the capital gain scheme but assessee has completed the construction of the residential property within the stipulated time and disclosed in Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2008. The assessee advanced money at initial stage and entered into agreement only in 2006 and completed construction within three years from the date of transfer of property which in not disputed by the Assessing Officer except that amount was not deposited in Capital Gain Scheme 1988 before due date u/sec. 139(1) of the Act. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) perused the grounds and considered the findings of the Assessing Officer and submissions made in the appellate proceedings on the ground of validity of reassessment proceedings, the Commissioner of Incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rused the copy of the judgements filed with the submission. In the instant case, the due date of filing return of income u/s 139(1) of the IT Act was 31.07.2005 and due date for filing of return of income u/s 139(4) of the IT Act was 31.03.2007. The appellant has spent ₹ 68 lakhs till 31.03.2007 for the purpose of purchasing house property. Therefore, out of the total sale consideration of ₹ 81,63,440/-, the appellant has utilized Rs. .68 lakhs before the extended date of filing of return of income u/s 139(4) of the IT Act. Possession of new property was taken on 15-12-2007 within period of 3 years from date of transfer of original asset i.e on 14-02-2005. Thus, the appellant has purchased the property within the stipulated period u/s 54F(1) of the IT Act. The issue involved in the appeal is whether the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the I.T Act in a case where substantial part of sale consideration was utilized for acquisition of new asset within extended date of filing of return of income u/s 139(4) of the I.T Act 1961 particularly when main conditions u/s 54F(1) were fulfilled. The Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Haryana in the case of CIT vs Jagtar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not in accordance with law. 7. Contra, the ld. Authorised Representative argued that the assessee has passed through the second round of re-assessment as the earlier assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act r.w.s 147 on 4.12.2009 and on same issue with change of opinion, the Assessing Officer has denied the exemption u/s.54F on the ground that assessee has not utilized the net sale consideration before due date of filing of return of income and the assessee has substainted with evidence of investments before the lower authorities and relied on the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and prayed for dismissing the appeal. 8. We heard the rival submissions, perused the material on record and judicial decisions cited. The ld. Departmental Representative contention being the assessee though constructed the property by investing, the net sale consideration but not before the due date of return u/s.139(1) of the Act nor said amount was deposited in Capital Gain Account Scheme. The argument of ld. Departmental Representative was in respect of the period of construction and there is no dispute on investment of the net consideration in residential property and provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31.07.2005. (iv) Due date of filing belated return : 31.03.2007. (v) Possession of the property : 15.12.2007. On considering the provisions of law and facts of the case, the assessee has invested ₹ 68,00,000/- before due date of filing belated return i.e. 31.03.2007 and took the possession as per the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 15.12.2007, being within three years from the date of transfer/sale of original asset being 14.02.2005. The assessee has not invested in Capital Gain Account Scheme before 139(1) of the Act but complied with the conditions u/s.54F(1) of the Act by purchasing and construction of residential property within three years from the date of transfer of original asset which is not disputed in the assessment proceedings or in appellate proceedings. The provisions of Sec. 54F are beneficial provisions and are to be considered liberally in the aspect of limitation period. But the investment in residential property is must which the assessee has proved with evidence and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
