TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A). In the result the first issue is decided in favour of assessee. Benefit of exemption u/s 54 in case residential house is purchased outside India - CIT (A) granted relief to the assessee by following the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in Leena J Shah [ 2016 (12) TMI 351 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) held that amendment in exemption in incorporating the word constructed one residential house in India in section 54F is inserted by Finance Act 2014 and applicable w.e.f . 01-04-2015 and accordingly would apply from 2015-16. The case of the assessee relates to AY 2013- 14. Therefore, the amendment brought by Finance Bill (No.2) Act, 2014 is not applicable in the case of assessee. Similar view was taken by Hon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and thus going against the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India Ors. (W.P No. 871 of 2014) (Bom) wherein it has been stated that there is no intendment in tax laws. 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the investment in a new asset in the USA is entitled for benefit under section 54 of the IT Act in relation to capital gains arising in India to the assessee? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in failing to appreciate that the charging section of the Act in form of section 4 does not contain the words in Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dment brought in by the Finance Act, 2014 in section 54 of the IT Act, 1961 is only clarificatory in nature in case of residents, as in case of non-residents the words in India were already intrinsically operating by way of provisions of section 5(2) of the Act? 2. At the outset of hearing, the Ld. Authorised representative (ld.AR) of the assessee submits that though the revenue has raised as many as 8 grounds of appeal; however, these grounds of appeal could be summarised in two basic issues, viz. Grounds 1 2 relating to adoption of indexation of cost of acquisition from the date when the previous owner acquired the asset; and grounds 3 to 8 relating to benefit of exemption u/s 54 in case residential house is purchased outside Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion from 2012 and resultantly granted indexation benefit from 2012. The AO further noted that the assessee purchased residential property outside India. Therefore, the exemption u/s 54 was also denied. 6. On appeal before CIT(A), the assessee was allowed indexation cost from the date f4rom 01-04-1981 by relying on the decision of jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs Manjula J Shah (2012) 204 Taxman 691 (Bom) wherein it was held that where a property is acquired under a will or gift or by inheritance, the asset acquired by earlier owner prior to 01-04-1981, then, indexation in respect of the said property is to be given w.e.f. 01-04-1981. In the present case, admittedly, the assessee inherited the property on the death of her parents. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
