TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esidential flat at F 1605, 16th floor, "Marigold" Block, The Gardens, Binnyston Garden, Magadi Road, Bangalore, on 16-06-2010 for a consideration of ₹ 57,77,137/-. Thus, as on 16.06.2010, other than the new asset at Magadi Road, the assessee has a flat at Brigade Gateway. So, he is entitled for a deduction u/s 54F on the investment made at Magadi Road property . Although, the assessee claimed such benefit before the AO & also before the CIT (A), as mentioned supra, his claim is not considered. Thus, his alternate plea is found meritorious and accordingly, the AO is directed to grant deduction on the investment made at Magadi Road property u/s 54F. The appeal is allowed to that extent. - I.T.A No.667/Bang/2016 - - - Dated:- 9-12-2016 - SHRI. VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri. Bharath L, ACS For The Revenue : Smt. Swapana Das, JCIT ORDER PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (A)-5, Bengaluru, dt.10.02.2016, for the assessment year 2011-12. 02. The facts in brief are that the assessee earning income from salary, e-fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1-09-2009, the right over the flat was assigned to him for a consideration of ₹ 74,49,359/-and furnished the break up for the total investment at ₹ 99,28,616/- as under: Paid to Ms. Priya Bhat: Premium charges ₹ 23,90,304/- Reimbursement of amount paid by first party ₹ 45,87,046/- Club membership ₹ 82,650/- Transfer free ₹ 3,89,359/- ₹ 74,49,369/- Paid to Brigade Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Electrification, water and sanitary charges Sale consideration as per sale deed ₹ 4,16,507/- Including stamp duty and registration charges ₹ 20,62,740/- ₹ 24,79,247/- Total: -Rs. 99,28,616/- 05. The AO , inter alia , held that the assessee adm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee is eligible for deduction U/s 54F as under : The assessee has purchased a flat at Brigade Gateway on 16-10-2009 i.e. long before the date of sale of the original asset dt 25-05-2010. For claiming deduction u/s.54F, the assessee should not purchase any residential house other than the new asset for a period of two years from the date of transfer of the original asset , i.e. since the original asset is transferred on 25- 05-2010 , no residential house has to be purchased within two years i.e. within 25-05-2012. In this case, the assessee has violated the proviso stipulated U/s. 54F(1) proviso (a)(ii) (iii) by purchasing the apartment at F 1605, 16th floor, Marigold block , The Gardens, Magadi Road, Bangalore, on 16- 06-2010. Hence he held that the assessee is not eligible for the deduction claimed U/s.54F also. 07. On an appeal, the CIT (A) -5, Bengaluru, inter alia , held that during the appel late proceedings the appellant furnished the very same documents and alternatively pleaded that assuming but not admitting what the appellant sold was a residential plot and not a residential building, the appellant should be given the benefit of Sec. 54F in respect of the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re property was used as a residential property. The LAO did not furnish any evidence to show that the property was used as a vacant land. e. Property tax paid as a residential house not as land tax and electricity bills indicate that the property was used for residential purposes; nothing in these bills indicated that the same was for a land. f. Water connection and electricity connection was provided by the utility authorities for residential use. 2. The AO incorrectly notes that assessee has paid land tax and not any tax on building; the AO has not considered that the same amount of tax has been paid in prior years as being towards building tax and the facts have not changed (see p. 40-p. 45 of the paper book). 3. The AO also incorrectly notes that no utility bills have been shown; the same were duly shown to the AO. The AO also alleges that the assessee has not shown any proof towards occupancy of the house, when the Appellant had shown the photographs (as above) and had mentioned that a family is residing in the house. 4. The AO incorrectly indicates that for a claim under section 54, income from house property should be declared. There is no such requirem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, the appellant put forth the argument that he should be given the benefit of section 54F in respect of the investment made the residential flat at Magadi Road, Bangalore vide written submission dt.27.03.2014, Annexure -3. Surprisingly, the AO completely ignored the submissions made in Annexure-3. He not only concluded that it is not a residential building thus denying the benefit of section 54. But also mistook the investment made in Brigade Gardens as the one for the purposes of section 54F although the assessee clearly made the claim on the investment made at Magadi Road property u/s 54F. 08. We heard the rival submissions and perused relevant material. The facts remain that as on 01.4.2010, the assessee had the residential property situated at No.7/232/415, Doddakallasandra village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk which was purchased on 03.6 01.7.2006 and a flat at Brigade Gateway which was purchased on 16-10-2009. He sold the residential property situated at No.7/232/415, Doddakallasandra village, Uttarahalli for a consideration of Rs. one crore on 25-05-2010. The AO has held that the building at Uttarahalli cannot be treated as a 'residential house' fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
