| The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 2055 (Ahd-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 54F
If the intention is not to retain cash but to invest in construction or purchase any property and if such investment period stipulated therein, then section 54F(4) is not attracted. It appears from the records that the assessee has complied with the requirement of the substantive provision of section 54F and, therefore, was entitled to the claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act. Hence, there is no reason to pass such order by the Revenue in disallowing the exemption of Rs. 35,07,459 as the claimed under section 54F of the Act by the assessee.
|
Capital gains - Deduction under section 54F - Assessee failed to comply with section 54F by not depositing the unutilized amount of capital gain in Capital Gains Deposit Scheme, 1988 within the stipulated time - But invested the sum in new asset within the stipulated time
The assessee on 3-7-2013 sold an immovable property with another co-owner having 50% share on it and subsequently on 11-12-2015 purchased a new property for a consideration of Rs. 85,00,000. The assessee then claimed Rs. 35,07,459 as long-term capital gain though the same was not deposited into a separate capital account before filing of the due date of return on income. However, the said amount has been utilized in acquiring the property purchased on 11-12-2015. The assessee's case was this though the said amount was not deposited in a separate capital account in nationalized bank before the due date of filing of return of income under section 139, but the said amount of capital gain has been duly utilized in acquiring the property within the time allowed by section 54F of the Act. Needless to mention that the property was sold on 7-3-2012 and the new asset was purchased on 11-12-2015 which is within the period under the condition stipulated by the provisions of section 54F of the Act. The case of the Revenue was this that the unutilized amount of sale consideration since not deposited in the capital gain account within the time limit prescribed under section 139 of the Act, benefit of claim of capital gain under section 54F cannot be extended to the assessee. Held: If the intention is not to retain cash but to invest in construction or purchase any property and if such investment period stipulated therein, then section 54F(4) is not attracted. It appears from the records that the assessee has complied with the requirement of the substantive provision of section 54F and, therefore, is entitled to the claim of exemption under section 54F of the Act. Hence, there is no reason to pass such order by the Revenue in disallowing the exemption of Rs. 35,07,459 as the claimed under section 54F of the Act by the assessee.
Applied:Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mill Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. (2003) 2 SCC 111, CIT v. K. Ramachandra Rao 2015 TaxPub(DT) 1933 (Karn-HC).
REFERRED : CIT v. Rajesh Kumar Jalan 2006 TaxPub(DT) 1793 (Gau-HC): (2016) 157 Taxman 398 (Gau), Mrs. Seema Sabharwal v. ITO 2018 TaxPub(DT) 1020 (Chd-Trib) and ITO v. Nilima Abhijit Tannu 2019 TaxPub(DT) 4802 (Mum-Trib)
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2014-15
IN THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|