News Update

CLAT 2024 exams to be held on Dec 1NCGG commences Programme for officials of TanzaniaGST - Appellate Authority has not noticed the provisions of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which mandates that the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced, is also to be excluded: HCDefence Secretary commends BRO for playing major role in country's securityGST - If the Proper Officer was of the view that the reply filed was insufficient, he could have sought more clarification - Without providing any such opportunity, impugned order could not have been passed - Matter remanded: HCSC holds influencers, celebrities equally accountable for misleading adsGST - Notice requiring petitioner to furnish additional information/clarification does not mention that petitioner had to appear for personal hearing - Since no opportunity of personal hearing was given, order is unsustainable: HCIndian Naval ships arrive at Singapore; to head towards South China SeaGST - For the purposes of DNB and FNB courses, petitioner clearly falls within the scope of an educational institution imparting education to students enrolled with it as a part of a curriculum - Services exempted: HCIndia's MEDTECH industry holds immense potential: Dr Arunish ChawlaKejriwal’s judicial custody extended till May 20GST - Candidates appearing for the screening tests are not students of the petitioner - Petitioner's claim of exemption on such examination fees is unmerited: HCBrisk voting reported from all 96 LS seats; PM casts vote in AhmedabadGST - NEET examinations are in the nature of an entrance examination - Petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of an exemption by virtue of Serial No.66(aa) of the 2017 Notification, which came into effect on 25.01.2018: HCIndia calls back half of troops stationed at MaldivesIndia-Australia DTAA: Economic Statecraft through TaxRBI alerts against misuse of banking channels for facilitating illegal forex tradingTime Limit to file Appeal in GST Appellate TribunalEC censures Jagan Reddy & Chandrababu Naidu for MCC violationsFrance tells Xi Jinping EU needs protection from China’s cheap importsI-T- Addition cannot be made merely for reason that assessee got property transferred through registered sale without making payment to vendor: ITATI-T- Addition which is not based on the reasons for reopening is un-sustainable sans notice u/s 148 of the ACT: ITATOxygen valve malfunction delays launch of Boeing’s first crewed spacecraftFM administers Oath to Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as first President of GST TribunalGhana agrees to activate UPI links in 6 monthsED seizes about 20 kg gold from locker of a cyber scammer in Haryana
 
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

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.


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