TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Geeta Duggal [2013 (3) TMI 101 - DELHI HIGH COURT] where it was held that unable to see how or why the physical structuring of the new residential house,whether it is lateral or vertical, should come in the way of considering the building as a residential house. The residential house consists of several independent units can be permitted to act as an impediment to the allowance of the deduction under Section 54/54F. The addition in dispute is deleted - appeal of the assessee allowed. - I.T.A. No. 7629/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 6-12-2019 - Shri H. S. Sidhu, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Sh. Akshay Abrol, Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 142(1) of the Act dated 12.11.2018 requiring assessee to furnish information as required on or before 19.11.2018. In response thereto assessee again sought adjournment till end of November, 2018. Finally, a show cause notice alongwith notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 12.12.2018 requiring him to furnish reply to the show cause on or before 17.12.2018. In response no reply was furnished and therefore, the assessment proceedings were finalized on the basis of details filed by the assessee. AO observed that the assessee was found to have entered into a collaboration agreement with Sh. Krishan Lal (second party) on 04.10.2012 for dismantling of old building of Plot No. 241, Sector-19, Faridabad measuring 350 sq.yds. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h regard to deemed long term capital gain on transfer of rights first floor of ₹ 34,64,495/-. Accordingly, an addition of ₹ 34,64,495/- was made to the income of the assessee on account of deemed long term capital gain and income of the assessee was assessed at ₹ 45,92,515/- u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.12.2018. Against the assessment order dated 28.12.2018, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 21.8.2019 has dismissed the appeal of the assessee and enhanced the income u/s. 251(1) of the Act. Aggrieved with the impugned order dated 21.8.2019, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the builder which is only one unit and as such the assessee is entitled to exemption of capital gains in full and not proportionately as mentioned in the assessment order. He further submitted that the similar issue has already been adjudicated and decided by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Geeta Duggal in ITA No. 1237/2011 vide judgment dated 21.02.2013. He draw our attention towards the relevant portion of the aforesaid judgement and requested that by respectfully following the said ratio the addition in dispute may be deleted by allowing the appeal of the assessee. 4. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities and stated that the revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... There is nothing in these sections which require the residential house to be constructed in a particular manner. The only requirement is that it should be for the residential use and not for commercial use. If there is nothing in the section which requires that the residential house should be built in a particular manner, it seems to us that the income tax authorities cannot insist upon that requirement. A person may construct a house according to his plans and requirements. Most of the houses are constructed according to the needs and requirements and even compulsions. For instance, a person may construct a residential house in such a manner that he may use the ground floor for his own residence and let out the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
