Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (4) TMI 854

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es do not subscribe to the arguments advanced by the learned AR for the assessee to claim benefit of deduction u/s.54 of the Act, in respect of purchase of new property in the name of married daughter, because courts have considered the provisions and after considering fact that the assessee has purchased house property in the name of spouse has allowed benefit, because as per provisions of section 64 64(1A) of the Act, in case of purchase of property is in the name of spouse and minor children, income from such property is assessable in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, under those facts, the Courts have held that when property was purchased in the name of spouse, benefit of deduction cannot be denied. In the present case, the ass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d in the order of the Apex Court , then same needs to be condoned in view of specific problem faced by the public on account of Covid-19 pandemic. 3. The learned DR, on the other hand, fairly agreed that delay may be condoned in the interest of justice. 4. Having heard both sides and considered reasons given by the learned AR for the assessee, we find that the Hon ble Supreme Court in suomotu Writ Petition No.3 of 2020, has extended limitation applicable to all proceedings in respect of courts and tribunals across the country on account of spread of Covid-19 infections w.e.f. 15.03.2020, till further orders and said general exemption has been extended from time to time. We further noted that delay noticed by the Registry pertains to t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4 in the income may please be deleted. 6. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, did not file her return of income for the assessment year 2011-12. As per information available with the department, it was noticed that the assessee had made huge cash deposits into her bank account. Therefore, assessment has been reopened u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961,for the reason that income chargeable to tax had been escaped assessment. In response to notice u/s.148, the assessee filed her return of income on 01.11.2018. The case has been taken up for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had sold her property through an agreement of sale dated 11.10.2010 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... investments made for the purpose of claiming deduction u/s.54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aggrieved by the learned CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. The learned A.R for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) not justified in sustaining addition of ₹ 16,77,574/- by disallowing deduction claimed under section 54 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, because new property was purchased in the name of appellant s daughter. The learned A.R for the assessee referring to the decision of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. V.Natarajan (supra) submitted that the Hon ble High Court very categorically held that what is required to be seen is that investment of sale consideration received from transfer of p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hase of another residential house property. As per plain reading of section 54 of the Act, it is very clear that investment should be made in the name of the assessee to get benefit of deduction. However, various courts, including the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. V.Natarajan (supra) had taken a lenient view considering beneficial provisions of section 54 of the Act, and held that even if investments is made in the name of spouse or minor daughter, the deduction cannot be denied. We have gone through the arguments of the learned A.R for the assessee in light of decision of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. V. Natarajan (supra) and we ourselves do not subscribe to the arguments advanced by the learned AR .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates