Tribunal grants full capital gain exemption under Section 54-F, making case reopening under Section 147 moot.

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to grant the entire capital gain as exempt under Section 54-F. The issue of the validity of the case reopening under Section 147 became academic due to the relief provided on merits.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of reopening the case under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Disallowance of the claim of exemption under Section 54-F of the Income Tax Act.
3. Non-adjudication of all grounds of appeal by the CIT(A).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Reopening the Case under Section 147:

The assessee challenged the reopening of the case under Section 147, arguing that there was no failure on their part to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for the assessment. The reopening was based on AIR information indicating that the assessee sold property for Rs. 51,37,500 and acquired bonds worth Rs. 5 lakh, which the Assessing Officer believed led to an escaped assessment of Rs. 56,37,500. The assessee contended that they were a co-owner and only received Rs. 25,68,750, not Rs. 51,37,500, and had purchased NHAI bonds worth Rs. 10 lakh, not Rs. 5 lakh. The Assessing Officer did not dispose of the objections raised by the assessee regarding the reopening. The CIT(A) did not adjudicate on the validity of the reopening despite the detailed submissions by the assessee.

2. Disallowance of the Claim of Exemption under Section 54-F:

The assessee claimed exemption under Section 54-F, arguing that they had deposited the entire capital gains in a capital gains account and purchased NHAI bonds before filing the return of income under Section 139(4). The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 14,94,166 of the exemption, asserting that this amount was not deposited before the due date under Section 139(1). The CIT(A) upheld this view, stating that the investment in the new asset was beyond the due date under Section 139(4).

The Tribunal, however, referred to the decisions of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar Jalan and the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Jagtar Singh Chawla, which held that Section 139 includes all its subsections, and the extended due date under Section 139(4) should be considered for claiming exemption under Section 54-F. Since the assessee had invested the capital gains in purchasing NHAI bonds and a new residential house within the extended period, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the entire capital gain as exempt under Section 54-F.

3. Non-adjudication of All Grounds of Appeal by the CIT(A):

The assessee raised a specific ground challenging the validity of the reopening under Section 147, which was not adjudicated by the CIT(A) despite detailed submissions. However, since the Tribunal allowed relief to the assessee on the merits of the case, the adjudication on the validity of reopening became academic and was not further pursued.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, directing the Assessing Officer to allow the entire capital gain as exempt under Section 54-F, and noted that the issue of the validity of reopening became academic due to the relief granted on merits. The order was pronounced in the open court on 18/01/2022.

---