TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1643X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possession letter is also on record. Therefore, in view of the binding judgment in the case of Pace Developers & Promoters (P) Ltd. vs Government of NCT (2013 (5) TMI 421 - DELHI HIGH COURT), we are unable to concur with the findings of the lower authorities and we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to allow benefit of exemption u/s 54 of the Act to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 3450/Del/2017, 4796/Del/2015 AY: 2009-10 - - - Dated:- 11-10-2018 - Shri G.D. Agrawal And Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava, JJ. Assessee by: Shri Manoj Kumar, CA Department by: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR ORDER PER BENCH Both these appeals have been preferred by the assessee. ITA No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not the legal owner of the property for which he had claimed deduction u/s 54 of the Act. The Ld. CIT observed that while claiming the benefit of exemption u/s 54, the assessee had claimed benefit of exemption of property purchased from his wife which was transferred to the assessee by his wife by a General Power of Attorney instead of a sale deed. After issuing show cause notice and taking the submissions of the assessee on record, the Ld. CIT reached the conclusion that the case required a deeper investigation by the Assessing Officer. He, accordingly, set aside the file to the office of the Assessing Officer with the direction to re-examine the entire matter. The assessee is in appeal against this order passed u/s 263 in ITA No. 479 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d an affidavit in this regard but we are of the considered opinion that the assessee also did not exercise proper care and diligence in looking after his own income tax assessment proceedings. We are of the considered opinion that the assessee cannot entirely shift the onus of carelessness to the AR in this regard and we are not inclined to condone the delay of 478 days. It is settled law that an avoidable cause for delay by due care and attention cannot be sufficient cause. Cause attributable to negligence or inaction of the party cannot be sufficient cause. Negligence and laches on the part of the counsel cannot be condoned. Accordingly, we dismiss the assessee s application for condonation of delay. 6.0 Accordingly, the assessee s appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Court in the case of Pace Developers Promoters (P) Ltd. vs. Government of NCT reported in (2013) 33 taxmann.com 99 (Delhi). The Hon ble Delhi High Court in this case, while referring to section 2(47) of the Act, has held that conveyance of immoveable property by a General Power of Attorney constituted transfer of capital asset. The Hon ble Delhi High Court also held that the Circular directing Registrars not to register conveyance of immoveable property by a General Power of Attorney was contrary to the observation of the Hon ble Apex Court and was liable to be set aside. In the assessee s case, the only objection of the various authorities to allowing the benefit of claim made u/s 54 of the Act is that the property was transferred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
