TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or deduction under section 54F for the entire investment made in the plot of land as well as construction of house instead of only part of the said land. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case the entire land through four separate sale deeds and construction of house on the same. The claim of the assessee is allowed. - I. T. A. No. 51/Jaipur/2016 - - - Dated:- 3-1-2020 - Ramesh C. Sharma Accountant Member And Vijay Pal Rao Judicial Member For the Assessee : Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate For the Department : K. C. Gupta, Joint Commissioner of Income-tax ORDER VIJAY PAL RAO (JUDICIAL MEMBER) .- 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated November 4, 2015 of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ajmer for the assessment year 2009-10. Earlier the appeal of the assessee was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated February 13, 2018, however, subsequently in the Rohan Agarwal v. Asst. CIT (Miscellaneous Application No. 117/Jaipur/2018 vide order dated May 7, 2019) the Tribunal has recalled the earlier order for fresh hearing and adjudication of the appeal of the assessee. The relevant findings of the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on also kindly be allowed. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in not considering all the four plots purchased as one single unit even though the appellant admittedly constructed a new residential house on one piece of land, which is contrary to the provision of law and facts. Hence, the appellant be declared as having fulfilled the requisite conditions and the deduction as claimed kindly be allowed in full. 3. The Assessing Officer erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest under sections 234B, 234C and 234D of the Act. The appellant totally denies its liability of charging of any such interest. 4. The appellant prays your honour indulgences to add, amend or alter of or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing. 2. The only issue arises in this appeal of the assessee is disallowance of claim under section 54F of the Income-tax Act in respect of the land purchased by the assessee vide 4 (four) separate sale deeds and constructed a residential house only on one plot out of 4 (four) plots. The learned authorised representative of the assessee has su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ell as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee has purchased four plots of land bearing Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 Moti Vihar Colony, Ajmer measuring 1784.99 square yards. All the four adjacent plots were purchased by the assessee on the same date May 19, 2008 and also covered with boundary wall around all four plots. Thus the assessee has merged all these four plots into one plot by erecting a boundary wall covering all the four plots and leaving only one entrance gate. The Assessing Officer has verified these facts through his inspector who filed the report which has been reproduced by the Assessing Officer at page 10 of the assessment order as under : Thus it is clear from the report of the inspector that on physical verification only one boundary wall was constructed around four plots and one entrance gate was left towards the road. The inspector has specified that for all these merged plots only one entrance gate is made in the boundary wall though the construction of the house is on one of the four plots. When these facts are not in dispute that the assessee purchased all these four adjoining plots of land on a single day and then merged them ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the house as residence for claiming of deduction under section 54 of the Act and property was not suitable for residence of the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee's electric connection in the constructed premises and the first flat was sold by the assessee on October 20, 2007 and the second flat was sold on March 15, 2008 whereas the assessee constructed room at plot No. C-114, Hanuman Nagar, Jaipur up to March 15, 2010, which is within three years from the date of sale of first flat, i. e., October 20, 2007. Thus, the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 54F of the Act on second investment at Hanuman Nagar property at ₹ 29,37,200. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this point. Thus it was held that even the construction of an area of 10 x 20 total covered area of 201 square feet, was considered as residential house. In the case of CIT v. Smt. Sunita Aggarwal (supra), the hon'ble Delhi High Court has held as under : The Tribunal has on an appreciation of the available material recorded a clear finding of fact to the effect that the property purchased by her was a single uni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
