CIT v. Jagtar Singh Chawla - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
Followed on Pr. CIT v. Shankar Lal Saini 2018 TaxPub(DT) 0314 (Raj-HC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax PublishersITA No. 71 of 2012 (O&M) 2013 TaxPub(DT) 1583 (P&H-HC) : (2013) 053 (I) ITCL 0162 : (2013) 259 CTR 0388 : (2013) 215 TAXMAN 0154 : (2013) 087 DTR 0217 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Capital gains --Exemption under section 54FPurchase of residential house before of next financial year--Assessee sold its agricultural land and residential house for Rs. 2,16,000 and Rs. 6,25,000 on same day assessee claimed to had written a letter to bank to deposit same amount in capital gains account' but it appears that same was deposited in 'flexi general account' which was a saving as well as a fixed deposit account. Assessee purchased a residential house from sale proceeds so received. Assessing officer rejected assessee's claim under section 54F and added a sum of Rs. 76,85,829 under head' Long term capital gains Commissioner (Appeals) upheld order of assessing officer which was however reversed by assessing officer. *Held :* Was justified as assessee had proved payment of substantial amount of consideration for purchase of a residential house (property) on or before 31-3-2008 that is within extended period of limitation of filing of return. Assessee was thus, entitled to everything under section 54F. In the present case, the assessee has proved the payment of substantial amount of sale consideration for purchase of a residential property on or before 31-3-2008, that is within extended period of limitation of filing of return. Only a sum of Rs. 24 lacs was paid out of total sale consideration of Rs. Two Crores on 23-4-2008, though possession was delivered to the assessee on execution of the power of attorney on 30-3-2008. Since the assessee, has acquired a residential house before the end of the next Financial Year in which sale has taken place, therefore, the assessee is not liable to pay any capital gain. Such is the view taken by the Tribunal. Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 260A In The Punjab & Harayana High Court Hemant Gupta & Ritu Bahri CIT v. Shri Jagtar Singh Chawla ITA No. 71 of 2012 (O&M) 20 March, 2013 Appellant by : Inderpreet Singh, Advocate JUDGEMENT *Hemant Gupta, J.* The Revenue is in appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) against an order dated 30-6-2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench D New Delhi (for short the Tribunal) in ITA No. 4923/Del/2010 for the assessment year 2007-08. The Revenue has sought the following substantial question of law : 'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Honble ITAT, New Delhi is justified in law in reversing the finding of Commissioner (Appeals) in confirming the addition of Rs. 76,85,829 made by the assessing officer by disallowing the claim of exemption under section 54F of the Income Tax Act as the assessee failed to deposit the unutilized consideration of capital gains in the Capital Gains Accounts Scheme as per the limit prescribed under the Act? SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax PublishersITA No. 71 of 2012 (O&M)
2013 TaxPub(DT) 1583 (P&H-HC) : (2013) 053 (I) ITCL 0162 : (2013) 259 CTR 0388 : (2013) 215 TAXMAN 0154 : (2013) 087 DTR 0217

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Capital gains --Exemption under section 54FPurchase of residential house before of next financial year--Assessee sold its agricultural land and residential house for Rs. 2,16,000 and Rs. 6,25,000 on same day assessee claimed to had written a letter to bank to deposit same amount in capital gains account' but it appears that same was deposited in 'flexi general account' which was a saving as well as a fixed deposit account. Assessee purchased a residential house from sale proceeds so received. Assessing officer rejected assessee's claim under section 54F and added a sum of Rs. 76,85,829 under head' Long term capital gains Commissioner (Appeals) upheld order of assessing officer which was however reversed by assessing officer. Held : Was justified as assessee had proved payment of substantial amount of consideration for purchase of a residential house (property) on or before 31-3-2008 that is within extended period of limitation of filing of return. Assessee was thus, entitled to everything under section 54F.

In the present case, the assessee has proved the payment of substantial amount of sale consideration for purchase of a residential property on or before 31-3-2008, that is within extended period of limitation of filing of return. Only a sum of Rs. 24 lacs was paid out of total sale consideration of Rs. Two Crores on 23-4-2008, though possession was delivered to the assessee on execution of the power of attorney on 30-3-2008. Since the assessee, has acquired a residential house before the end of the next Financial Year in which sale has taken place, therefore, the assessee is not liable to pay any capital gain. Such is the view taken by the Tribunal.

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 260A

In The Punjab & Harayana High Court

Hemant Gupta & Ritu Bahri

CIT v. Shri Jagtar Singh Chawla

ITA No. 71 of 2012 (O&M)

20 March, 2013

Appellant by : Inderpreet Singh, Advocate

JUDGEMENT

Hemant Gupta, J.

The Revenue is in appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act) against an order dated 30-6-2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench D New Delhi (for short the Tribunal) in ITA No. 4923/Del/2010 for the assessment year 2007-08.

The Revenue has sought the following substantial question of law :

'Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Honble ITAT, New Delhi is justified in law in reversing the finding of Commissioner (Appeals) in confirming the addition of Rs. 76,85,829 made by the assessing officer by disallowing the claim of exemption under section 54F of the Income Tax Act as the assessee failed to deposit the unutilized consideration of capital gains in the Capital Gains Accounts Scheme as per the limit prescribed under the Act?