9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 54F of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 3. Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that there was search in the premises of the assessee. During the year under consideration, according to the Ld. D.R., the assessee sold a landed property at Door No.99, New Avadi Road to M/s J.K. Holding Company Pvt. Ltd. for a total sale consideration of Rs. 9 Crores. However, the sale deed was registered disclosing the sale consideration only at Rs. 6 Crores. The balance Rs. 3 Crores was received by the assessee in cash. However, the balance was deposited in the bank account in the name of the children of the assessee. Referring to the order of the assessment, the Ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... According to the Ld. counsel, the balance amount of Rs. 2,99,50,000/- was deposited in State Bank of India in the name of the assessee, his wife and children. Before due date for filing of the return of income, according to the Ld. counsel, the Department seized the amount by withdrawing the same from bank account, therefore, the money was with the Department. The assessee was physically prevented from depositing the same in the Capital Gains Account, hence, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee. The Ld.counsel further submitted that the due date for depositing in Capital Gains Account is the due date for return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act. Before the due date, the money was taken by the Department. Hence, accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cific provision. No doubt, the assessee has not made any specific claim. However, he claimed exemption under Section 54 of the Act in the return of income filed by him. The assessee has not indicated the specific provision. The return of income clearly shows that the assessee claimed deduction under Section 54B/54D/54EC/ 54F/54G/54GA. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that that the provisions of Section 54 and 54F of the Act are beneficial provisions. Merely because the assessee has not made any specific reference, that cannot be a reason to disallow the claim of the assessee. It is not a case of the Revenue that the assessee is not eligible for deduction under Section 54F of the Act. Therefore, mere non-reference about specific se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
