Assessee entitled to tax exemption for flat purchase under section 54F
Income Tax Officer, Ward-34 (1), Kolkata. Versus Bejoy Kumar Chirimar
Income Tax Officer, Ward-34 (1), Kolkata. Versus Bejoy Kumar Chirimar - TMI
Issues Involved:1. Whether the tenancy of the assessee was a colorable device to evade capital gains tax.
2. Whether M/s. B. K. Tushar, HUF was the actual tenant and not the assessee or his spouse, thereby invalidating the claim of exemption under section 54F of the Income-tax Act.
Summary:Issue 1: Colorable Device AllegationThe Revenue contended that the tenancy was a colorable device to evade capital gains tax, citing that the father of the assessee was a director of M/s. Gyaniram & Sons Pvt. Ltd. (GSPL). The Tribunal noted that the father had died in 1963, and the development agreement between GSPL and Concrete Developers Pvt. Ltd. (CDPL) was entered into in 1995, 32 years later. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s observation that the transaction could not be a colorable device, given the long period and the genuine tenancy evidenced by rental receipts and bank statements. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s finding that the transaction was not a colorable device.
Issue 2: Actual Tenant and Exemption under Section 54FThe AO argued that M/s. B. K. Tushar, HUF was the actual tenant, not the assessee or his spouse, based on a security deposit refund agreement. The Tribunal found that the tenancy was in the names of the assessee and his spouse, as evidenced by rent receipts and bank statements. The Tribunal agreed with CIT(A) that the HUF received the deposit for convenience and that the actual tenants were the assessee and his spouse. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the assessee was entitled to the exemption under section 54F of the Income-tax Act for the flat valued at Rs.2,26,37,500/-.
Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, confirming that the assessee was lawfully entitled to the benefit of exemption under section 54F, and the transaction was not a colorable device. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed.