TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1769X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee and are of the view that the same is clear and self-explanatory wherein the assessee has categorically stated that on the date of purchase of residential property, which happens to be the date prior to date of sale of the original asset, he didn t own any other house other than the new asset. In that view of the matter, the contention so raised by the ld AR is accepted. Assessee is held eligible for deduction under section 54F in respect of residential house property purchased in the name of his wife. - Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - ITA. No. 139/JP/2016 - - - Dated:- 8-12-2017 - Shri Vijay Pal Rao, JM And Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM Assessee by: Ms. Shivangi Samadhani (CA) And Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be purchased by the assessee in his own name nor is it necessary that it should be purchased exclusively in his name. It was submitted that the assessee has not purchased the new house in the name of a stranger and entire investment has come out of the source of the assessee and there was no contribution from the assessee s wife. The submission of the assessee was considered but not found acceptable to the Assessing Officer. As per Assessing Officer, the property which was sold was belonging to the assessee whereas the reinvestment in property (residential house) has been made in the name of Smt. Nikita Jain, wife of the assessee. It was further held by the AO that Smt. Nikita Jain, wife of the assessee, is having her PAN and filing he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kamal Wahal (351 ITR 4), wherein, in the context of section 54F of the Act and purchase of house in the name of assessee s wife, it was held that the new residential house need not be purchased by the assessee in his name nor is it necessary that it should be purchased and exclusively in his name. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in case of CIT vs. V. Natarajan (287 ITR 271) where the house was purchased in the name of the assessee s wife, deduction under section 54 was allowed. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Late Gulam Ali Khan vs. CIT (165 ITR 228) wherein in the context of section 54 of the Act, it was held that the word assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not permit. Following the decision of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Kalya, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the rejection of claim of the assessee u/s 54F of the Act. 9. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR reiterated the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A). Further, ld. AR also drawn our reference to the recent decision of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Sh. Mahadev Balai vs. ITO (D.B. ITA No. 136/2017 others dated 07.11.2017) wherein in the context of section 54B, it was held that where the investment is made in the name of the wife, the assessee shall be eligible for claim of deduction u/s 54B of the Act. 10. In the said case, the assessee has sold agricultural land and purchased another agricultural land in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court are contained at para 7.2 and 7.3 of its order which are reproduced as under:- 7.2 On the ground of investment made by the assessee in the name of his wife, in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Sunbeam Auto Ltd. and other judgments of different High Courts, the word used is assessee has to invest, it is not specified that it is to be in the name of assessee. 7.3 It is true that the contentions which have been raised by the department is that the investment is made by the assessee in his own name but the legislature while using language has not used specific language with precision and the second reason is that view has also been taken by the Delhi High Court that it can be in the name o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... house was filed before the AO which was however not accepted without any cogent reason. Our reference was also drawn to an affidavit of the assessee confirming the said fact which was also submitted as confirming evidence before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR has contended that ld. CIT(A) has not doubted the said affidavit and has also not confirmed the disallowance on the ground that it could not be verified and it was accordingly submitted that since the revenue is not in appeal against the order of ld. CIT(A), the contention so raised by the assessee should be accepted. The ld DR fairly submitted that the ld CIT(A) has mainly relied on the decision of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Kalya (supra) and has not objected to the confirmat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
