TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue of the Government, which the law does not permit. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, is found to have rightly disallowed the exemption under Section 54B of the Act. - Decided against assessee Disallowance of deduction U/s 54F - Held that:- Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kalya Vs. CIT & ors. (supra) had occasion to deal with the question of eligibility of Section 54B of the Act but has not examined the claim made U/s 54F of the Act, therefore, the revenue has not brought our notice any other binding precedent of the eligibility of deduction U/s 54F of the Act. Therefore, by respectfully following the judgment of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs P.R. Seshadri (2009 (7) TMI 814 - Karnataka High Court ) wherein held though the land may be in the ownership of the assessee' s spouse, nevertheless the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that construction work was in progress during April 21, 1995 till August 31, 1996, and the wife of the assessee could have included the value of construction for mortgage purposes and this alone does not mean that construction was carried o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80.00 lacs, therefore, he computed long term capital gain on this asset at ₹ 79,22,973/-. The A.O. also treated ₹ 1.00 lac as agricultural income and thus the A.O. computed capital gain at ₹ 79,22,973/- and ₹ 1.00 lac as agricultural income. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, partly allowed the appeal. While partly allowing the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) disallowed the claim made U/s 54B and 54F of the Act on the ground that the property has been purchased in the name of his wife and the investment made in construction of the house on the property belonging to the wife of the assessee. 5. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The 3rd ground of the appeal is against confirming the addition on account of disallowance of deduction U/s 54B of the Act. The ld. AR of the assessee has reiterated the submissions as made in the written submissions and has further submitted that as per Section 54B of the Act, the deduction is available if the assessee purchased any other land for being used for agricultural purposes. He has submitted that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... val contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and also gone through the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed facts remain that the assessee has sold a land and purchased capital asset in the name of his wife and claimed deduction U/s 54B of the Act. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the two Hon'ble High Courts and the ld. AR has also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Vatika Township (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) and also drew our attention to Section 64 of the Act to buttress the contention that the investment made in the name of the wife would be eligible for deduction U/s 54B of the Act as the provision of Section 54B is not clear whether the investment would be restricted to the assessee. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vatika Township (supra), where two views are possible, the view which is favourable to the tax payer should be adopted. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the contention of the assessee and material available on record. We fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned counsel for the appellant. If the word 'assessee' is given a liberal interpretation, it would be tantamount to giving a free hand to the assessee and his legal heirs and it shall curtail the revenue of the Government, which the law does not permit. 9. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, is found to have rightly disallowed the exemption under Section 54B of the Act. 10. The impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal is just and apposite, based on cogent findings, with which we fully concur and thus, the same warrants no intervention. In view of the above binding precedent, we do not seen any reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the same is hereby affirmed. Accordingly, this ground of assessee s appeal is dismissed. 9. The 04th ground of the appeal is against disallowance of deduction U/s 54F of the Act. The ld. Counsel of the assessee has submitted that the authorities below have failed to appreciate the fact of Section 54F of the Act, does not envisage that the land should also belong to the assessee on which the construction is made. He reiterated the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
