TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 312X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urchase of the new house on 26-8-2016 itself. As explained the reasons for not-depositing the amount in Capital Gains Accounts Scheme which is also not disputed. Since the assessee has substantially complied with section 54(1), therefore, a mere non-compliance of a procedural requirement under section 54(2) itself cannot stand in the way of the assessee in getting the benefit under section 54. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned CIT (A). The Grounds raised in the appeal of the Revenue stand dismissed. - IT APPEAL NO.2777 OF 2019 AND C.O. NO.106 (CHNY.) OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 20-7-2020 - Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member And S. Jayaraman, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Ms. Vijaya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned CIT(A), the assessee explained, inter alia, that she had negotiated with the owner of the new property, M/s. Securities Analysis (India) P Ltd, during June, 2016 and the Directors of the company and their authorized signatory were stationed/residing in Mumbai Only. The owners had assured her that they will come to Chennai and register the property soon, i.e. immediately after the negotiations in June, 2016. But, the owners took considerable time and thus there was a delay on the owner's part to come to Chennai and register the property. When it was getting delayed too long, she decided to deposit the amount in CGAS and accordingly, did it on 18-8-2016. A week later, ie on 26-8-2016, the owner visited Chennai and registered the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, if the assessee utilizes the amount in purchasing (or constructing) the new residential house before the due date of filing the return under section 139 of the Act, (which includes the due date mentioned at sub-section(4)), then, the assessee becomes eligible for the deduction under section 54/54F of the Act, irrespective of the fact whether the assessee deposited the amount in the specified schemes before investing it in the new house or not. Since in this case, the assessee has purchased the new property on 26-8-2016 itself, which is well before the due date of filing the return under section 139(4), the utilization of the amount in purchasing a new residential property is within the time limits permitted in the provisions of sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than v. ITO, [I.T.A. No. No. 2040/Chny/2017, dated 29-5-2020] and Smt M.K. Vithya v. ITO [I.T.A. No. No. 2739/Chny/2017 dated 9-1-2018]. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The facts narrated in para-2 of this order, supra, are not disputed. Therefore, the issue in this case is whether the assessee is entitled for the benefit of deduction under section 54 in respect of the disputed sum, when she has utilized such sum towards purchase of the new house on 26-8-2016 and thus complied with the provisions of section 54(1), even though the said sum was not deposited in the capital gains account scheme as required under section 54(2). The same issue arose before the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome-tax Act, it has been observed as fo lows : If the intention is not to retain cash but to invest in construction or any purchase of the property and if such investment is made within the period stipulated therein, then section 54F(4) is not at all attracted and therefore, the contention that the assessee has not deposited the amount in the bank account as stipulated and therefore, he is not entitled to the benefit even though he has invested the money in construction is also not correct. 16. Learned counsel for the Revenue relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 6 GSTR-OL 46 (SC)/[2018] SCC Online SC 747 in support of her contention that exemption notification should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ie the date of transfer. She has utilized such sum towards purchase of the new house on 26-8-2016 itself. Further, she had explained the reasons for not-depositing the amount in Capital Gains Accounts Scheme which is also not disputed. Since the assessee has substantially complied with section 54(1), therefore, a mere non-compliance of a procedural requirement under section 54(2) itself cannot stand in the way of the assessee in getting the benefit under section 54. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned CIT (A). The Grounds raised in the appeal of the Revenue stand dismissed. 6. Since we upheld the order of learned CIT (A) in Revenue's appeal, the Cross Objections filed by assessee in suppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
