TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 982X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act as prescribed u/s 54(2) of the Act. We are of the view that in the case of assessee the deduction claimed should be examined in the parameters of section 54F - We make it clear that assessee shall furnish necessary evidences of construction or purchase of new residential property in Chicago, USA. A.O. has to examine the same and decide the issue in the light of the order cited - We are of the opinion that it is appropriate to remit the issue to examine the claim of the assessee and decide in accordance with law. Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. - IT(IT)A No.879/Bang/2019 - - - Dated:- 23-12-2020 - Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice President And Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Pratik R., A.R. For the Respondent : Smt. R. Premi, D.R. ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the Ld. CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru dated 30.3.2019. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in the case of the appellant, in the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of the return of income for condonation of delay in making the investment in the new residential house which was a pre-condition for the claim of u/s. 54. 4. Deposited a sum of ₹ 3.30 crores on 15.6.2015 in the Capital Gains account when the refund claim for 2014-15 was received. 5. Since, the delay in the investment in the new asset for claim of exemption u/s. 54 was attributable beyond the control of the assesse it was requested that the exemption may be allowed. 3. The Ld. A.R. for the assessee placed reliance on the judgement of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. K. Rama Chandra Rao (277 CTR 522), However, the lower authorities rejected the claim of the assessee on the reason that unutilized amount of Capital Gains should be invested in the Capital Gain Scheme notified by the Central Government before the due date of filing the return of income. Since the assessee has not deposited the unutilized portion of capital gains into the capital gain deposit scheme before the due date of filing of return of income, same was denied. Now the contention of the Ld. A.R. is that section 54 of the Act does not mention the due date as mentioned in secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 139(1) of the Act. However, by that time, he has not utilized the amount of ₹ 2,59,03,849/- in construction of new residential house or deposited the same in capital gain account scheme as notified by the Central Government. In other words, unutilized capital gain should have been deposited in capital gain account before due date of filing of return u/s 139(1) of the Act. Now the contention of the Ld. A.R. is that even if the assessee deposited unutilized portion of capital gain after the due date provided u/s 139(1) of the Act, assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 54 of the Act. This argument cannot be upheld. To avail benefit u/s 54 of the Act, unutilized portion of capital gains shall be deposited by assessee in capital gain account scheme before due date of filing of return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act as prescribed u/s 54(2) of the Act. 6. On the other hand, the assessee made an alternative argument that the assessee made investment in purchase of house at Chicago in USA within the stipulated time u/s 139(4) of the Act. Even the investment in residential property in foreign country, he has also entitled the assessee to claim such deduction. As held by coordina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4-15 and the provision in section 54F comes w.e.f. 01.04.2015 according to which it was clarified that the residential house is to be acquired only in India meaning thereby before this amendment it was not clear as to whether the benefit of section 54F can be given to residential house acquired in India or abroad. This issue was examined by the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Iqbal Jafar (supra) which was authored by one of the members of this Bench and it was held by the Tribunal that before the amendments, the benefit can also be given to the residential house acquired in abroad. The relevant observation of the Tribunal is extracted hereunder for the sake of reference: 9. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of the orders of the authorities below, find that it has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Apex Court and various High Courts that cardinal rule of interpretation is that the statute must be construed according to its plain language and neither should anything be added nor subtracted therefrom unless there are adequate grounds to justify the inference that the legislature clearly so intended. It is also well settled that in a taxing statu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olding that the assessee is entitled for exemption under section 54F of the Act for of house property outside India i.e. in Canada. 16. Having carefully examined various judicial pronouncements and the order of the Id. CIT(A), we find pt in the case of Leena J. Shah v. Assts. (2006) 6 SOT 72 I (Ahd.), the Tribunal has taken a t view that the words in India cannot be inserted in section 54F of the Act and as per plain of section 54F of the Act, the sale proceeds of capital asset shall be invested in residential house or outside India. We, accordingly, following the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case v. Vegetable Products Ltd [1973j 88 ITR 192, hold that the view favourable to the assessee taken ous Benches of the Tribunal should be followed and accordingly following the same, we hold that the assessee is entitled for exemption under section 54F of the Act. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the Id. CIT(A), who has rightly adjudicated the issue in the light of the ratio laid down by the Tribunal in a number of cases. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is confirmed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 4. Since the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
