TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 929X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. Consequent to that, the developer issued allotment letter and also entered into an agreement dated 05.07.2011. As per the agreement the developer was supposed to hand over the possession of plot within 18 months from the date of allotment letter - developer did not deliver the possession. Hence, the assessee could not complete the construction within the prescribed period of 3 years. This delay in construction was not attributable to the assessee. AO and the CIT (A) have denied the exemption in view of the provision of section 54 and 54F. The AO and the CIT (A) both have ignored the fact that the assessee has made a full payment to the developer and such payment was more than the amount of the deduction claimed by the assessee. Sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee had invested the long term capital gain on purchase of residential plot and remain invested for more than three years. b) That the Ld. CIT (A) had not considered the fact that the assessee has been allotted a residential plot by the builder, but due to possession of the plot was given by the builder after expiry of three years from date of capital gain hence it was not possible for the assessee to complete the construction before the time stipulated for claiming exemption u/s 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is prayed that disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 54F of ₹ 24,12,480/- deduction u/s 54 of ₹ 28,77,944/- is unjustified, unwarranted and bad in law, which is liable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst exemption of ₹ 52,90,424/- claimed by her. The assessee has filed copy of the allotment letter. The assessee also submitted the copy of agreement dated 05.06.2011 entered into by the assessee with the developer. As regard the construction he submitted that the same could not be done as the developer could not transfer the possession to the assessee despite there being a clear condition in the agreement that the possession will be given within a period of 18 months for the date of the allotment letter. Thus, the reason for delay in construction was beyond assessee s control. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that the total cost was ₹ 63,03,005/- and the same stood paid and hence the assessee had discharged all her obligation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee has made a total investment of ₹ 63,03,005/- which is more than the exemption of ₹ 52,90,424/- claimed by her; and lastly , the assessee made this investment within the prescribed period. This payment was made to the developer Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Pvt. Ltd. Consequent to that, the developer issued allotment letter and also entered into an agreement dated 05.07.2011. As per the agreement the developer was supposed to hand over the possession of plot within 18 months from the date of allotment letter. However, the developer did not deliver the possession. Hence, the assessee could not complete the construction within the prescribed period of 3 years. This delay in construction was not attrib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00/- in the capital gain account with PNB so as to construct the house. This unequivocally demonstrate that assessee really intended to construct the new residential house thereon. It was based on this bonafide intention assessee had claimed exemption under section 54 of the Act. Without the purchase of land, house could not have been constructed. The first step was to purchase the land, which was done. Thereafter the developer was to handover the plot, so that assessee could have constructed the house within time allowed of 2 years. However, no step could be put forward thereafter because possession of land was not given by the Developer, for reasons beyond the control of the assessee. If an assessee sells his house prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon transfer of his old residential premises and thereafter purchases or constructs a new premises within the time stipulated under section 54 of the Act, the Legislature does not want him to be burdened with tax on the long-term capital gain and, therefore, relief has been given to him in respect of paying income-tax on the long-term capital gain. The intention of the Legislature or the purpose with which the said provision has been incorporated in the Act, is also very clear that the assessee should be given some relief. Though it has been very often said that common sense is a stranger and an incompatible partner to the Income-tax Act and it is also said that equity and tax are strangers to each other, still this court has of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
