TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... long-term capital gains. The Tribunal has held that the relevant date in this connection is July 29, 1988, when the petitioner paid the full consideration amount on the flat becoming ready for occupation and obtained possession of the flat. This has been taken by the Tribunal as the date of purchase. The Tribunal has looked at the substance of the transaction and come to the conclusion that the purchase was substantially effected when the agreement of purchase was carried out or completed by payment of full consideration on July 29, 1988, and handing over of possession of the flat on the next day. Clearly, therefore, the date relevant for determining the purchase of property is the date on which full consideration is paid and possession ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has by not considering the fact that the assessee was not eligible to claim deduction u/s.54F of the Act as the assessee had advanced an amount of ₹ 1,00,00,000/-on 20.04.2012 for the purchase of the new property in 2012 only. Whereas, the sale agreement of five commercial properties sold by the assessee was made in 2014 and 2015. It is clear from the section 54F that deduction u/s. 54F can be claimed either one year before or two years after the transfer of property takes place. However in this case the assessee made substantial payment of ₹ 1,00,00,000/-for the purchase of property at Vile Parle(E) in F.Y 2012-13to Zee Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. which is co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned CIT(A) who upheld the claim of the assessee, and observed as follows:- I have gone through the AO s order and the appellant s factual and legal submission. The fact of the case is that the appellant has sold five commercial properties and has invested the same in one residential property and has claimed exemption u/s. 54F. The AO has denied the exemption stating that payments for acquisition of the house fell beyond period of 1 year prior or within 2 years after date of transfer since the payments towards property began as early as in 2012. As per the AO's contention, according to the provisions of section, 54F, deduction can be claimed either one year before or two years after the transfer of property takes place. However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transfer took place purchased, or has within a period of three years after that date constructed, one residential house in India (hereafter in this section referred to as the new asset), the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say.... It has been held in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Beena K Jain 217 ITR 363 (Bom) ITA No 2896/Mum/2014, the Hon'ble Tribunal has held that the relevant date in this connection is, when the petitioner has paid the full consideration amount on the flat becoming ready for occupation and obtained possession of the flat. This has been taken by the Tribunal as the date of purchase. The Hon'ble Tribunal has looked at the substance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of possession. The same falls within the statutorily prescribed time limit and hence, deduction is to be allowed under section 54F. Accordingly, on the basis of facts and legal decisions, this ground is Allowed. 4. The Assessing Officer is aggrieved of the relief so granted by the CIT(A) and is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 6. We find that the issue in appeal is squarely covered by Hon ble jurisdictional High Court s judgment in the case of CIT vs Beena K Jain [(1996) 217 ITR 363 (Bom)] wherein their Lordships have observed as follows:- The assessee who is the respondent before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a period of one year before or two years after the date of which the transfer took place purchased a residential house, the capital gain shall be dealt with as provided in that section. As per the section certain exemption has to be allowed in respect of the capital gains to be calculated as set out therein. The department contends that the assessee did not purchase the residential house either one year prior to or two years after the sale of the capital asset which resulted in long-term capital gains. According to the department, the agreement for purchase of the new flat was entered into more than one year prior to the sale. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit under section 54F. In our view the Tribunal has rightly negati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
