TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... livery of possession of the property , which the assessee intends to purchase, beyond the time line fixed under the provisions of the Act - HELD THAT:- We agree with the view of the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer rightly granted deduction to the assessee taking into account the settled legal position that investment of the entire capital gains for construction of a residential house within the stipulated period alone is relevant, and delivery of possession by the builder/promoter of the assessee of the said residential house cannot be a ground to deny the assessee deduction under Section 54F of the Act, for the reason that the assessee has no control over the actions of the builder/promoter and he cannot be punished for the delay on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... templated under Section 2(47) of the Act did not materialize as per the timeline mentioned in Section 54F of the Act; and that there was a delayed receipt of sale consideration of ₹ 5,97,945/- which should be treated as income from other sources. He accordingly set aside the assessment order and directed fresh assessment by order dt.14.03.2013. 7. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed a fresh assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act on 29.11.2013 adding delayed receipts for sale consideration of ₹ 5,97,945/- as income from other sources. He disallowed the respondent s claim for deduction under Section 54F of the Act of ₹ 1,51,38,015/-. 8. The respondent filed an Appeal against the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the fault of builder/promoter, the assessee cannot be made to suffer because he is not at fault and such default by the builder/promoter is not within the control of the assessee and he would be entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 54F of the Act. 11. Assailing the same, this Appeal is filed. 12. Though counsel for the appellant sought to contend that the order passed by the Tribunal is unsustainable, we do not agree. 13. The finding of the Tribunal that the amount received by the assessee from his purchaser of ₹ 5,97,945/- cannot be termed as interest because there is no finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax as to the rate of interest, is a finding of fact. Also the value of the said item is far less ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
