TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 188
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Year 2007-08 on 31.7.2007 declaring an income of Rs. 26,09,840 comprising of income from salary, capital gains and other sources. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') by order dt.26.11.2009 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 46,53,270 on account of the denial of the assessee's claim for exemption of Rs. 20,43,430 under section 54 of the Act. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of assessment for Assessment Year 2007-08 dt.26.11.2009, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (Appeals), LTU, who dismissed the assessee's appeal by order dt.28.3.2013. 3. Aggrieved bythe order of the CIT (Appeals) dt.28.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the interest levied under section 234A, 234B and 234C by the assessing authority. 8. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal the appellant prays that the appeal maybe allowed." 4. On perusal, we find that since the grounds raised at S.Nos.1,6 & 8 are general in nature, no adjudication is called for thereon. 5. The ground at S.No.7 challenges the charging of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. The charging of interest is consequential and mandatory and the Assessing Officer has no discretion in the matter and we, therefore, uphold his action in charging the same. The Assessing Officer is, however, directed to recompute the interest charg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estion took place on 6.11.2006. It is the claim of the assessee that he has constructed a residential property in the property situated at 110, Upkar Spring Fields, Neralur village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore (hereinafter called 'Anekal Property') within the period of three years ending 5.11.2009. 5.2.3 In assessment proceedings, since the assessee reportedly failed to furnish any completion certificate in respect of construction of the residential house at Anekal, the Assessing Officer got an enquiry conducted by the Inspector of his office. The Inspector visited the Anekal Property on 10.11.2009 and reported that there was only a temporary structure measuring 300 sq. ft. with asbestos sheet roof, without any water or elect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Authority ('APA'), it raises serious doubts about the residential intent behind the temporary structure constructed. 6.4 In the proceedings before us, the learned Authorised Representative reiterated the claims for exemption under section 54 of the Act in the grounds raised at S.Nos.2 to 5 (supra) and also the submissions made before the authorities below. In support of the assessee's claim for exemption under section 54 of the Act, the learned Authorised Representative placed reliance on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of Dr. R. Balaji in ITA No.164/Bang/2012 dt.5.10.2012 which in turn had relied on the decision of another co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of M.A. Patel in ITA No.182....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s also not in dispute that the Anekal site is located in a designated residential area approved by BMRDA. In the light of the above evidence, the question that needs to be decided is as to whether the assessee has constructed a residential house so as to enable to claim exemption under section 54 of the Act. 6.6.2 On this issue, the Assessing Officer has concluded that the structure put up on the Anekal site is only a temporary structure, that is not fit for residential purposes and therefore the assessee is not eligible to claim deduction under section 54 of the Act. In our view, this can hardly be the basis on which one can conclude that the assessee did not construct a residential house. The Inspector's report admits that a building s....