TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1006X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y should be situated in India or outside India. The submission of the DR also holds merit on the ground that the assessee is a co-owner of the property situated in USA which was evidenced by the property record details submitted by the Ld. DR. There is also merit in the argument of DR that the assessee habitually resides in the property situated in USA and has disclosed the address of that property in the assessee s Passport. Contention of the Ld. AR that the property at USA is a Farm House cannot be accepted. Since the assessee owned one more residential house at the time of transfer of original asset, the assessee is not entitled to claim the benefit of deduction u/s. 54F of the Act. Hence, the Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... questionnaire were issued on 2/3/2016. The Assessee s Representative appeared before the Ld. AO from time to time and furnished the information called for by the Ld. AO. Not satisfied with the submissions made by the Ld. AR, the Ld. AO made the following additions: Sl no Nature of Addition Amount (in Rs.) 1. Difference in preconstruction Interest 79,422 2. Land Development expenses 1,40,575 3. Disallowance of exemption U/s. 54F 2,47,43,894 Total 2,49,63,891 Aggriev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed to the assessee on this ground also. Therefore, the Ld. DR pleaded that the order of the Ld. AO be upheld. Per contra, the Ld. Authorized Representative [AR] submitted that the assessee only owns a Farm House and not a residential house in USA. Further, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has invested substantial amount in the property to be purchased for claiming exemption U/s. 54F of the Act whereas the builder has delayed the construction which is beyond the control of the assessee. The Ld. AR also further submitted that the assessee has issued a legal notice to the builder in this connection. The Ld. AR therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld. Countering the arguments of the Ld. AR, the Ld. DR submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, the whole of such capital gain shall not be charged under section 45 ; (b) if the cost of the new asset is less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, so much of the capital gain as bears to the whole of the capital gain the same proportion as the cost of the new asset bears to the net consideration, shall not be charged under section 45: Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where (a) the assessee, (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of transfer of the original asset; or (ii) purchases any residential house, other than the new asset, within a p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of original asset, the assessee is not entitled to claim the benefit of deduction U/s. 54F of the Act. Hence, the Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is allowed. 9. Grounds No. 2 3 are with respect to the investment made by the assessee in the property beyond the period of three years. Since the Ground No.1 raised by the Revenue is adjudicated against the assessee by denying the benefit of exemption U/s. 54F of the Act as the assessee became ineligible to claim such exemption on the fact that the assessee owns more than one residential house at the time of transfer of original asset, the adjudication of Grounds No. 2 3 becomes infructuous and hence dismissed. 10. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed. Pronounced in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
