SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

PM to hold roadshow in Puri on MondayViolations of economic sanctions: Criminal penalties come into forceBengaluru Customs nabs 4 pax with gold powder worth Rs 1.96 CroreKejriwal’s assistant put in police custody for 5 days in Swati Maliwal caseAllahabad HC upholds decision to dismiss judicial officer demanding dowryNawaz Sharif alleges former Chief Justice plotted to oust him as PM in 2017Heavy downpours claim 50 lives in Central AfghanistanSoaring funeral costs compelling people to let go bodies unclaimed in Canada9 pilgrims burnt to death as bus catches fire near Nuh in HaryanaSpain denies dock permission to Indian ship carrying arms to Israel12 Unicorns, over 125 startups commit to onboarding ONDCBEML secures Rs 250 crore order from Northern Coal FieldsBharat Parv celebration takes centerstage at Cannes Film FestivalSteel industry should work towards reducing emissions: Steel SecretaryI-T - Additions framed on account of unexplained cash credit & unexplained money, are not tenable where cash deposits & withdrawals were of personal funds & were done through banking channels: ITATUS says not too many vibrant democracies in the world than IndiaI-T - Benefit of section 11(2) can not be denied merely on reasoning that form 10 is filed belatedly: ITATIndia says Chabahar Port to benefit Central Asia and AfghanistanRussia seizes Italy’s UniCredit assets worth USD 463 mnCus - Order re-determining transaction value based on CRCL test report is not correct & hence unsustainable: CESTATCus - If price is not sole consideration for sale, then transaction value can be rejected under Rule 8 of Export Valuation Rules & then must be redetermined sequentially through Rules 4 to 6: CESTATSC upholds ICAI rules capping number of audits per year
 
I-T - Exemption u/s 54F can still be allowed if sale consideration is invested to purchase new residential flat before date specified u/s 139(4) : ITAT

By TIOL News Service

KOLKATA, DEC 20, 2018: THE ISSUE IS - Exemption u/s 54F can still be allowed if sale consideration is invested to purchase new residential flat before date specified u/s 139(4) of Act. YES IS THE VERDICT.

Facts of the case

The assessee an Individual, had filed return of income for relevant AY. The assessee entered into an agreement with Wagholi Properties Pvt. Ltd. for purchase of flat in the building known as Panchshil Towers. The AO issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to Wagholi Properties wherein the flat cost was confirmed at Rs. 2,37,47,500/- + other charges of Rs. 22,73,575/-. The assessee sold shares of K.B. Industrial Alloys Pvt. Ltd for Rs. 1,46,92,300/-. These shares were purchased by the assessee in financial year 1988-89 and 2008-09. The assessee derived long term capital gain of Rs. 1,45,42,091/-. The assessee claimed exemption u/s 54F of Act in view of his new investment in purchase of flat. The AO observed that out of sale proceeds received on sale of shares, the assessee had advanced a sum of Rs. 1,21,00,000/- for providing unsecured loan to M/s Kay Bee Functionary Services Pvt. Ltd. in which he was one of the directors and holding majority of the shares thereon. The AO also observed that further a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- was invested in Kotak Bond and Rs. 2,00,000/- for other purposes by the assessee. The AO also observed that the assessee failed to deposit the monies in the capital gain account scheme before the due date of filing of return of income. Accordingly, AO, held that the assessee was not entitled for claim of exemption u/s 54F of the Act. The assessee pleaded that the entire long term capital gain and net sale consideration had been duly invested by the assessee in purchase of new residential flat before the due date specified u/s 139(4) of the Act. However on appeal, CIT(A) upheld the order of AO.

Tribunal held that,

++ the assessee had invested net sale consideration for purchase of new residential flat before the date specified u/s 139(4) of the Act. The issue under dispute is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal in the case of Sunayana Devi vs. ITO, wherein it was held that Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT, Bangalore vs K.Ramachandra Rao had held that if the assessee invests the entire consideration in construction of the residential house within three years from the date of transfer he cannot be denied deduction u/s 54F of the Act on the ground that he did not deposit the said amount in capital gain account scheme before the due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act. Respectfully following this decision, it was held that the assessee is entitled for claim of exemption u/s 54F of the Act in the facts of the instant case. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

(See 2018-TIOL-2447-ITAT-KOL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST