| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0181 (Bang-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 54F
If assessee had utilised sale consideration within 3 years, then requirement of non-compliance of section 54F could not come in the way of assessee in claiming deduction. Once it is demonstrated that consideration received on transfer had been invested either in purchasing a residential house or in construction of a residential house, even though transactions were not complete in all respects and as required under the law, that would not disentitle the assessee from the said benefit. Accordingly, matter was remanded back to AO for verifying the quantum of amount spent by assessee before three years from the date of transfer of original asset and accordingly, examining deduction claimed under section 54F.
|
Capital gains - Deduction under section 54F - Allowability - Assessee had not invested unutilized sale consideration amount into capital gains account scheme before due date prescribed under section 139(1) for filing of return of income
Assessee transferred certain property and claimed deduction under section 54F. AO rejected assessee's claim on the ground that assessee had not invested unutilized sale consideration amount into capital gains account scheme before due date prescribed under section 139(1) for filing of return of income and assessee had not completed construction within 3 years from date of transfer of original asset.Held: If assessee had utilised sale consideration within 3 years, then requirement of non-compliance of section 54(2) could not come in the way of assessee in claiming deduction. Once it is demonstrated that consideration received on transfer had been invested either in purchasing a residential house or in construction of a residential house, even though transactions were not complete in all respects and as required under the law, that would not disentitle the assessee from the said benefit. Accordingly, matter was remanded back to AO for verifying the quantum of amount spent by assessee before three years from the date of transfer of original asset and accordingly, examining deduction claimed under section 54F.
Followed:Venkata Dilip Kumar v. CIT (2019) 111 Taxmann.com 180 (Mad) : 2019 TaxPub(Dt) 7658 (Mad-HC), CIT v. K. Ramachandra Rao [ITA No. 47 of 2014 : 2015 TaxPub(DT) 1505 (Hyd-Trib) and CIT v. Sambandam Udaykumar (2020) 345 ITR 389 (Karn) : 2012 TaxPub(Dt) 1804 (Karn-HC).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Matter remanded.
A.Y. : 2013-14
IN THE ITAT, BANGALORE BENCH
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|