TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 923
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assumption of revisionary jurisdiction u/s.263 of the Act by the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax. 3. A show cause notice was issued by the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax u/s.263 of the Act dated 15.07.2016 which relates to the claim of exemption u/s.54F of the Act by the assessee and the observations contained therein that the exemption u/s.54F of the Act is with regard to the cost of only new assets and however, whether that would also include the deposits made in the Capital Gain Scheme and the cost of interior work done by the assessee therein. That according to the Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, on this, neither any enquery was done by the Assessing Officer nor there was any application of mind by the Assessing Officer a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....opy of computation of income giving detailed working of capital gain along with Xerox copies of all sale and purchase deed before the Assessing Officer. That even the copy of the relevant purchase deed was also enclosed and already been filed before the Department. 5. The Ld. AR vehemently argued that the issue raised in the show cause notice u/s.263 of the Act were all enquired into specifically by the Assessing Officer and detailed reply have been filed before him by the assessee. Therefore, the order passed by the Assessing Officer is not erroneous and also not prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. For this proposition, the Ld. AR has placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Fine Jewellery (I) Ltd., 372 ITR 303 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the purchaser i.e. the assessee herein are necessary expenses for habitation in that flat. These expenses are not for any decoration purposes rather they are necessary to live suitably in that flat. The Ld. AR further submitted the Hon"ble Courts in various decisions held that any expenses incurred by the assessee for suitable habitation would also be covered u/s.54F of the Act exemption. For this proposition, the Ld. AR has placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) Rahana Siraj Vs. CIT, 128 DTR 0302 (Kar.) (ii) Saleem Fazebhoy Vs. DCIT, 108 TTJ 0894 ( Mum.) 8. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We have also considered the judicial pronouncements placed before us. In this case, revisionary jurisdic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct that specific queries were made during assessment proceedings with regard to details of expenditure claimed under head "miscellaneous expenses" aggregating to Rs. 2.94 crores. The assessee has responded to same and on consideration of response of assessee, AO held that amount of Rs. 17.98 lakhs incurred on account of repairs and maintenance out of Rs. 2.94 crores was capital expenditure. This itself would be indication of application of mind by AO while passing impugned order. The Hon'ble High Court further considered the decision in the case of Idea Cellular Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (2008) 301 ITR 407 ( Bom.) and held that if query is raised during assessment proceedings and responded to by the assessee, mere fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he order were to be carried out by the assessee himself. These expenses are necessary to suitably live in that particular flat. These expenses are necessary for habitation in that particular flat. They do not pertain to any decoration item rather they are all essential to make a flat fit for living. 13. In the case of Rahana Siraj Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra.), the Hon"ble Karnataka High Court has observed that "question arose for consideration was if ITAT was right in holding that assessee was not entitled to make deduction in respect of additions/alterations made to property after purchase in order to have normal living in computing deduction u/s.54F, when no such restriction has been provided u/s.54F, property purchased by the....