TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidering the submissions, we remand this issue to the Ld.AO keeping all the contentions open. The Ld.AO is directed to consider the claim in accordance with law. - ITA No. 2812/Bang/2018 - - - Dated:- 12-7-2022 - Shri. Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member And Smt. Beena Pillai, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri Srinivas Rao Bandaru, JCIT DR ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal is filed by the revenue against order dated 20/07/2018 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-5, Bangalore for A.Y. 2015-16 on following grounds of appeal: 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: 2.1 Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2015-16 on 31.03.2017 declarin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 60,00,000/- (FY 2014-2015) b. 10.04.2015 Rs. 50,00,000/- 10.04.2015 Rs. 50,00,000/- Rs. 1,00,00,000/-(FY 2015-2016) c. 02.11.2015 Rs. 3,65,00,000/-(FY 2015-2016) Total Rs. 5,25,00,000/- 2.5 Assessee submitted that the said amount was more than the capital gains earned and assessee had claimed section 54 in r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in case till the date of filing the return of income if the assessee is not in a position to purchase or construct another house, then the benefit of exemption can be availed by depositing the unutilised amount in capital gains deposit account scheme in any branch of public sector bank, in accordance with Capital Gains deposit accounts scheme, 1988. However the Assessing Officer observed that the appellant has not claimed/proved to have any such capital gain deposit accounts. Also the assessee has not proved the commencement of any construction of residential house. Hence, the entire deduction claimed U/s.54 and 54F in respect of both the property is not acceptable and the assessment concluded after addition of Rs. 3,20,59,991/- (Rs. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acquisition of residential house. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held in the case of Bajaj Tempo Ltd.Vs CIT reported in 196 ITR, 188 as follows: A provision in taxing statue granting incentive for promoting growth and development should be construed liberally, the restriction on it too has to be construed so as to advance objective of the provision and not to frustrate it. In view of the factual as well as legal matrix of the case, I hereby allow the grounds raised by the appellant. 2.7 Aggrieved by the above observations of the Ld.CIT(A), revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The Ld.CIT.DR at the outset submitted that the additional evidences in support of assessee s claim towards completion of the construction of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
