TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 1036
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ized on sale of a land. 3. The facts relating to the issue under consideration are stated in brief. The assessee along with seven other persons sold a property admeasuring 1.46 acres located at Kasargod. The assessee had 1/8th share in the above said property and accordingly received Rs.68,43,750/- as his share in the sale consideration. The assessee incurred a sum of Rs.4,81,250/- as expenses towards brokerage. Thus the net consideration received by the assessee was Rs.63,62,500/-. The assessee computed Long term capital gain as under:- Net Consideration received 63,62,500 Less:- Cost on 2.5.2003 11,44,500 Improvement incurred in F.Y 2003-04 4,96,000 16,40,500 Cost attributable to assessee's share 2,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....valuer. From the said valuation report, the AO noticed that the assessee had started construction of the building in the year 2001. The existing area of the building was 634.56 Sq. mts and the addition/extension stated to be done was 73.82 sq. mts. In the valuation report, it was stated that the super structure of the building was completed by 2003, i.e., about 4 years before the date of sale of land. It was further stated that, subsequently during the period from December 2007 to April 2010, additional constructions along with the finishing works like flooring, painting, polishing and plumbing works were executed. The Registered valuer had estimated the cost of whole building at Rs.62,54,101/-. Before the AO, the assessee submitted that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision in the case of Mrs. Meera Jacob (313 ITR 411) the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 54F of the Act. (d) As per the details furnished by the assessee and the bank authorities it is not conclusively proved that the deposit was made in the Capital gains Account scheme. (e) The certificate issued by the bank appears to be erroneous. (f) Tax receipt has not been produced. (The assessee has furnished only two receipts which is Building Permit fee paid as against demand No. 301608 dated 10.06.2008 of Rs.1600/- & Building Construction license fee dated 04.3.2008 paid for a sum of Rs.30/-) (g) Original Approval of competent authority granted for construction of the building was not furnished. (h) The period of construc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailable for alteration / extension of the existing building. In this regard, he placed reliance on the following case law:- CIT Vs. Pradeep Kumar (153 Taxman 138)(Mad) Mrs. Meera Jacob Vs. ITO (313 ITR 411)(Ker). Accordingly, the Ld CIT(A) held that the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 5. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee had started the construction of the building in the year 2001, but could not complete the same fully. A lot of work including flooring, painting, polishing, plumbing works were pending. He submitted that the assessee completed those works only during the period from Dec. 2007 to April 2010. He submitted that the assessee, in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the repayment of bank loan is eligible for deduction u/s 54F of the Act. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of Mumbai Bench in the case of Ishar Singh Chawla Vs. DCIT (2010)(130 TTJ (Mum)(UO) 108). 6. The Ld D.R, on the contrary, submitted that the assessee has only put up small construction by extending existing area of the building. In this regard, he invited our attention to pages 18 & 18A of the paper book, wherein the registered valuer has identified the area extended. He also submitted that the Power of Attorney holder of the assessee Shri T.B. Kunhimahin Haji has also confirmed that the residential building is extended. He submitted that Registered valuer has also stated that the additional construction was only 73....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is that he has put up second floor also, besides carrying out finishing works in the existing building. In support of the said submissions, the assessee has filed copies of building permission granted by the competent authority and also copies of approved floor plans, as additional evidences. Thus the materials furnished before us is in total contradiction to the view entertained by the tax authorities. According to Ld A.R, the second floor is self contained residential unit. It is also his contention that even the existing building was in unfinished state. 9. Further the assessee has furnished the details of utilization of sale proceeds of Rs.68,433,750/- as under in page 51 of the paper book. Brokerage - 4,81,250 Transfer to ....