TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I bonds to claim Section 54EC deduction - decline of deduction as the said statutory provision caps the re-investment amount to ₹ 50lacs only, therefore restrict assessee’s claim to ₹ 50lacs to disallow the remaining equal amount - Held that:- We find no force in this approach above of revenue. Hon’ble Madras high court’s judgment in CIT vs. C. Jaichander (2014 (11) TMI 54 - MADRA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... COUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Kinjal V. Shah, A.R. For The Revenue : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr. D.R ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER This assessee s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the CIT(A)-13, Ahmedabad s order dated 29.10.2015, in case no. CIT(A)- 13/Ahd/152/2014-15, upholding Assessing Officer s action restricting Section 54EC deduction cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emaining equal amount. We find no force in this approach. Hon ble Madras high court s judgment in CIT vs. C. Jaichander (2015) 370 ITR 579 (Madras) has admittedly upheld a co-ordinate bench s decision that such a deduction claim of ₹ 50 lacs each spread over to two financial years but falling within six months of the capital asset s transfer in question is very much allowable. We further tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
